Sitting of 24 July 1911

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

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Private Bills [Lords] (Standing Orders not previously inquired into complied with), —Mr. Speaker laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, namely:—
Metropolitan Water Board (New Works) Bill [Lords].
East Kent Electric Power Bill [Lords].
Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.
Provisional Order Bills [Lords] (No Standing Orders applicable),—Mr. Speaker laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, namely:
Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [Lords].
Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time To-morrow.
Provisional Order Bills (No Standing Orders applicable),—Mr. Speaker laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, namely:—

Commons Regulation (Winton and Kaber) Provisional Order Bill.

Commons Regulation (Burrington) Provisional Order Bill.

Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time To-morrow.
Dundee Harbour and Tay Ferries Bill [Lords] (King's Consent signified),
Bill read the third time, and passed,, with Amendments.
Handsworth Urban District Council Bill[Lords],
Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Kingston-upon-Hull Corporation Bill. [Lords],
As amended, considered; to be read the-third time.
Paddington Borough Council (Superannuation and Pensions) Bill [Lords],
Read a second time, and committed.
Poplar Borough Council (Superannuation and Pensions) Bill [Lords],
To be read a second time To-morrow.
Rhondda Urban District Council Bill [Lords],
Read a second time, and committed.

MINES AND QUARRIES.
Copy presented of General Report for the year 1910 by the Chief Inspector of Mines. Part I., District Statistics [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
SHOP HOURS ACT, 1904.
Copies presented of Orders made by the under-mentioned authorities, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the Hours of Closing for certain classes of Shops within the several districts: county of Derby (Buxton and Fairfield Urban Districts) and the Urban District of Rhondda (two-Orders) [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
IRISH LAND COMMISSION.
Copy presented of Report of the Commissioners for the year ending 31st March, 1911 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

RAILWAY RETURNS.
Copy presented of Returns of the Capital, Traffic Receipts, and Working-Expenditure of the Railway Companies of the United Kingdom for the year 1910,

1437
with a General Report thereon and Summary Tables for a series of years [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

TREATY SERIES (No. 19, 1911).
Copy presented of Treaty between the United Kingdom and Paraguay for the Mutual Surrender of Fugitive Criminals. Signed at Asuncion, 12th September, 190S (Ratifications exchanged at Asuncion, 30th January, 1911) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
DOMINIONS (No. 10, 1911).
Copy presented of Report of a Conference on the question of Reciprocity throughout the Empire in the Examination and Authorisation of Surveyors [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
DOMINIONS (No. 11, 1911).
Copy presented of Papers relating to the Financial Relations in the British Self-governing Dominions between the Central and the Local Governments [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Copy presented of Minute of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland, dated 24th July, 1911, providing for a new Election of the Committee on Secondary Education for various Districts in Scotland appointed by the Minute of 10th August, 1909, as amended by the Minutes of 6th September, 1909, and 4th November, 1910, and altering the Constitution of certain of the Committees [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  Persia.
  Colonel YATEasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he was able to make any statement as to the new circumstances that have arisen in Persia consequent on the return of the ex-Shah?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. McKinnon Wood): I have no particulars on the sub-
  1438
  ject of a more detailed nature than those which have appeared in the daily Press. It is as yet too early to say what the result of the ex-Shah's return and the unfortunate renewal of civil strife will be.
  Viscount WOLMERasked whether the Anglo-Japanese alliance relates to Persia or any part of Persia; whether the territorial rights referred to in Sub-section (c) of the Preamble include the British rights in the portion of South-Eastern Persia delimitated in the Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907 as the British sphere; and whether the geographical area to which the alliance relates has been in any way affected by the omission of Article 4 of the Anglo-Japanese Treaty, 1905?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The answer to the points raised in this question is in the negative.

  Albania.
  Mr. NOEL BUXTONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he could give any further information as to whether the Albanian refugees in Montenegro were receiving adequate subsistence in food, shelter, and clothing; and whether His Majesty's Minister at Cetinje would give assistance in the distribution of funds if money is sent to him from England for the purpose of relieving the refugees?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I have no information in regard to the condition of the Albanian refugees in Montenegro other than that given in my reply to the question addressed to me on the 18th instant by the hon. Member for the Bridgeton Division of Glasgow. In regard to the second portion of the hon. Member's question, I have already stated that His. Majesty's Government would do their best to obtain facilities from the Montenegrin Government for any private and independent organisation that desired to collect and distribute relief among the Albanian refugees and non-combatants. His Majesty's representative at Cetinje could not himself undertake the distribution of money forwarded from this country, but he would give all proper assistance to any agent of such organisations who may be sent to Montenegro for the purpose.
  Mr. DAVID MASON: With regard to Albania, have we not some responsibilities and treaty obligations?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I cannot add anything to the answer I have given.

  Morocco.
  Mr. FELLasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he would keep in. view the advantages which the port of Agadir possesses for the shipment of the produce of the Suss region of South Morocco, and will try in any pourparlers or conversations which may be taking place to arrange that the port of Agadir shall be opened to the commerce of all countries?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: His Majesty's Government are fully alive to the importance of an open port at Agadir, and they will lose no opportunity of urging this upon the Treaty Powers.
  Mr. REMNANT: May I ask whether His Majesty's Government have protested against the Germans' presence at this place?

  Government Cartage Contractors (Fair-Wages Clause).
  Mr. BOWERMANasked the hon. Member for Southampton, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether inquiries were made as to whether the firm of Messrs. R. Tozer and Sons, contractors for the cartage of coal, were violating the Fair-Wage Clause in the payment of the wheelwrights and painters in their employ; and, if so, with what results?
  The TREASURER of the HOUSEHOLD (Mr. Dudley Ward): The contract between the Commissioners of Works and Messrs. R. Tozer and Sons relates solely to cartage; and the First Commissioner is not in a position to extend his enquiries to the employés of this firm who are not concerned in the cartage contract. The First Commissioner is satisfied that in this respect the conditions of the Fair Wages Clause are observed.

  King Edward Memorial.
  Mr. NOEL BUXTONasked the hon. Member for Southampton, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, if he will say when he will submit the detailed plans for the suggested King Edward memorial in the Green Park, so that the House may decide whether it wishes to ask for a discussion on the matter, in accordance with the Prime Minister's undertaking to grant a discussion if desired by the House?
  Mr. DUDLEY WARD: The First Commissioner will be glad to lay the plans as
  1440
  soon as possible; but as the sculptor is only now being appointed, he fears that it is quite impossible for him to fix any definite date?
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE: May I ask whether a plan cannot be at once submitted showing the exact site of the memorial?
  Mr. DUDLEY WARD: I think there is one already.

  House of Commons (New Lift).
  Sir WILLIAM BYLESasked the hon. Member for Southampton, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, would he consider, having regard to the convenience of Members of this House, members of the Press Gallery, and others, the advantage or practicability of constructing a passenger lift from the Terrace floor to the Committee floor, in the well of the staircase outside the newspaper room, up and down which there is such continuous traffic?
  Mr. DUDLEY WARD: The First Commissioner of Works will be happy to consider this proposal in the light of the expenditure involved, and of the possibility of devising suitable plans.

  Royal Dockyards.
  Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state the number of men now employed on the Government docks at Rosyth?
  The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. McKenna): The numbers asked for ire as follows:—Staff, 119; workmen, 1,871.
  Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKEasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he can now give a date when the petition from the Royal dockyards will be answered; and whether he will see that a reasonable time is allowed to elapse before; he petitions for this year are required to be sent in?
  Mr. McKENNA: Replies to the petitions lave now been issued, and reasonable time will be allowed for the presenting of new petitions.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what he regards as a reasonable time?
  Mr. McKENNA: At least a month.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that complaints are being made that the order allowing hired men in the Royal dockyards when they reach the age of sixty to be medically examined year by year until they are sixty-five, and if found fit and recommended by their respective foremen and inspectors to remain at work until they reach the latter age, is not being carried out by the engineer manager and constructive manager at Devonport; whether he can say if these complaints are well founded; and, if so, why the usual course is being departed from?
  Mr. McKENNA: The Admiralty instructions in regard to the discharge of workmen on account of age are as follows: "Workmen and other employés, whether established or hired, are, as a general rule, and except in the cases mentioned below, to be discharged on arriving at the age of sixty years. In special cases, in which the employés are certified by the leads of their departments to be fully efficient and particularly eligible, and are certified by the medical officer of the yard to be physically fit to perform their duties, they may, with the approval of the superintendent, be retained beyond the age of sixty. Each case of retention is to be reviewed every year, and continued retention will be subject to re-certification and approval, but in no case is an employé to be retained after reaching the age of sixty-five." It will be seen from the foregoing that the Order referred to by the hon. Member is permissive. The Admiralty instructions are that, as a general rule, workmen are to be discharged at the age of sixty; such discharge is, therefore, not regarded as a departure from the usual course.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of my question, "Whether he can say if those complaints are well founded?"
  Mr. McKENNA: I have explained that there is no ground for any complaint being made; and I have given the hon. Member all the information I have on the subject.

  Haiti.
  Mr. MITCHELL - THOMSONasked whether, in view of the revolutionary trouble in Haiti, any British warship has been sent to protect British interests?
  Mr. McKENNA: It has not been considered necessary to send a ship up to the
  1442
  present, but one will be sent if the situation requires it.

  Elementary School Teachers.
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the President of the Board of Education whether the Board can devise a more equitable basis for the salaries of teachers in elementary schools than that of the average attendance at such schools; and, if not, whether the Board will direct all local education authorities to follow the course already adopted in Gloucestershire of not reducing a teacher's salary owing to a reduction of attendance over which he has no control, unless such teacher can obtain a post elsewhere under the same authority at not less than his existing salary?
  The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Runciman): It is satisfactory to know that several local education authorities have recently modified their regulations in the direction Suggested by the hon. Member, and I hope their example will be widely followed. I have, however, no authority to take the step suggested in the second part of the question.

  Education Grants.
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that, in consequence of the Memorandum issued by the Board in September, 1909, local education authorities have caused to be excluded from school all children coming from infected homes, or suspected of being infectious, with the result that a serious loss in the Government grant has been incurred in consequence of the diminution in the average attendance at the schools thereby affected; whether it is proposed that local education authorities should suffer financially in consequence of action taken in the best interests of their schools and of public health; and, if not, whether the Board will take steps to ensure that in such cases no loss of grant shall be incurred?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: The object of the exclusion from school of children from infected or suspected homes is to prevent a greater number of children from becoming affected. The achievement of this object will avert a further loss of grant on children who would otherwise in all probability have required to be excluded for actual sickness. I am unable to hold out any prospect of any new grant regulations pending the Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee on the relations between Imperial and local finance.
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the right hon. Gentleman, whether he is aware of the effect of the system of basing the Government grant for elementary education upon the average attendance at individual schools upon education authorities and their ratepayers in all areas where the produce of a penny rate for children in. average attendance is comparatively small owing to the poverty of such area, and also upon progressive authorities which expend considerable sums in the provision of instruction in handicraft, gardening, domestic science, and other like subjects, or in a more liberal staffing of their schools; and, if so, whether he will consider the advisability of substituting an arrangement for the appropriation of Government grants under which an estimate of the total expenditure of such authorities shall be made by such authorities and submitted to and approved by the Board at the beginning of each school year, and the annual expenditure of the authority as shown, by such estimate shall, subject to the imposition of a county rate of 9d. in the £, be borne as to the balance in equal shares by the Exchequer and the rates?
  Mr. RUNC1MAN: I think a very strong case can be made out for a reconstruction of the present system of distributing grants for elementary education, and I hope it may be practicable to take such a reconstruction into consideration after the Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee on the relations between Imperial and Local Taxation. It is not clear whether the scheme outlined in paragraph (2) of the question is intended to apply to all local education authorities, but, if so, it would apparently involve a reduction in the Exchequer Grants-in-Aid of elementary education by some three and a-half million pounds. I am afraid, therefore, that the proposal, which would no doubt be received with acclamation by the Treasury, would be likely to meet with a hostile reception in the country.

  Art Education and Advisory Committee.
  Mr. GRANTasked if the standing committee of advice for art education superseded the advisory committee for the Victoria and Albert Museum; and, if so, did the secretary of the new committee receive the salary in the estimates for the secretary to the advisory committee of the museum?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: No, Sir, the new committee-will not advise as to museum pur-
  1444
  chases. The answer to the second paragraph is in the negative.

  Stamps.
  Mr. TOUCHEasked the Secretary to the Treasury, whether, in view of the fact that the present stock of stamps appeared to be sufficient for only seven weeks, whereas it was formerly the practice to keep a six months' stock, and that the present contractors found it necessary to work overtime to accumulate necessary reserve stocks, he would say what precautions had been taken to guard against the risk of shortage of supplies in the event of a strike or fire on the contractors' premises?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Hobhouse): Precautions have been taken to guard against the risk of shortage of supplies in the event of a strike or fire on the contractors' premises-by reserving the right to the State in that event to obtain supplies of stamps elsewhere.
  Mr. TOUCHEasked whether the contractors for the supply of King George V. postage stamps had experienced any difficulties with the plates manufactured by the Mint?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: The answer is in the negative.
  Mr. TOUCHEasked if an essential condition of the contract for the supply of postage stamps insisted on by a late controller of stamps was the maintenance by the contractors of a complete duplicate equipment of stamp-producing machinery in a fireproof place; and if this condition had been required from the new contractors?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: The late contractors were required by the terms of their agreement to maintain reserve gumming and perforating machinery in a fireproof strong-room. It was not thought necessary to-insert this condition in the new contract in view of the provisions to which I have already referred.
  Mr. TOUCHEasked the Secretary to the Treasury to what extent the Mint Estimates would be increased to provide plates for stamps, the cost of which was included in the late contractors' old prices for stamp production; and could he say what the actual saving, if any, was, having regard to the simultaneous tenders of the past and present contractors, after

  1445
  allowing for the increased estimates for the Mint for plate production, for the additional cost of control due to working by night and day, and for the waste of paper while the present contractors gained manufacturing experience?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: The annual cost of manufacture at the Royal Mint of printing plates for the ½d. and Id. stamps is estimated at £400; and the Mint Estimates for this service will, therefore, be increased to that extent. It is not the case, however, as suggested by the hon. Member's question, that the late contractors' old prices for stamp production were free of all charges for plate making. I regret that I do not feel able to state what is the estimated saving as between the simultaneous tenders of the past and present contractors. No additional cost of control is incurred by reason of the present contractors working overtime; and, after making all due allowances, including the cost of plate making at the Mint, it is anticipated that the actual saving will be very considerable.

  Female Emigration.
  Colonel YATEasked the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the suggestions for the help of women emigrants published under the signatures of so many lady presidents of women's aid societies, and of the fact that there was now an excess of 1,330,399 females over males in the population of the United Kingdom, and that this excess was steadily increasing, he would consider the question of co-operating with those women's aid societies in their efforts to promote the cause of female emigration?
  The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Burns): I do not think I can usefully add anything to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member's question on the 12th instant.

  Locomotives on Highways Act, 1896.
  Captain MURRAY: asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he proposed to make regulations under Section 6 of the Locomotives on Highways Act, 1896, prohibiting motorists in London from driving with open cut-outs?
  Mr. BURNS: Before coming to a decision I am making some inquiry into the matter.

  Local Government Auditors.
  Mr. FALLEasked the President of the Local Government Board if he would state the number of auditors and assistant auditors appointed under the Local Government Board since 1906, and the number of such appointments given to chartered or incorporated accountants?
  Mr. BURNS: The number of auditors and assistant auditors appointed by the Local Government Board since 1906 is twenty-six. Of these five are chartered accountants.

  Unemployment.
  Sir HILDRED CARLILEasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he was aware that there was an increase of 18 per cent. in the number of members-of trades unions returned as unemployed at the end of June, 1911, as compared with the number so returned at the end of May, 1911; and whether he could state what particular trades were more immediately concerned?
  The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Buxton): As stated in the July "Labour Gazette," the percentage unemployed among the members of trades unions making returns was 3.0 at the end of June compared with 2.5 at the end of May and 3.7 at the end of June, 1910. Full particulars of the trades that contributed to the increase may be found in the Board of Trade Labour Gazette of this month. I may add that the percentage unemployed for June is lower than that for the corresponding month of any year since 1901.
  Sir HILDRED CARLILE: Is the building trade one of those trades? It has been greatly affected by the land taxes of the Government.
  Mr. BUXTON: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put the question on the Paper. I do not admit his suggested explanation.

  Swine Fever.
  Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether his attention had been called to the paper on swine fever read by Professor Paul Uhlenhuth, the director of the bacteriological department of the Kaiserliches Gesundheitsamt, in Berlin, at the Royal Institute of Public Health on Wednesday last; whether the veterinary experts of the Board shared the views expressed in the paper as to the nature of the disease, the means of its

  1447
  transmission, and the methods of destroying its germs and so preventing its spread; and whether the employment of an immunisation serum, as advocated by the lecturer, was considered practicable by the Board's veterinary advisers?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Edward Strachey): No. Sir, but I will make myself acquainted with the paper to which the hon. Member refers.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: I cannot hear a word.

  Increment Value Duty.
  Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he had made inquiry into the facts of the Increment Value Duty case at Richmond, Yorkshire; and whether he could make a statement on the subject?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: Notice of appeal against the assessment to Increment Value Duty has been given, and, pending the result of such appeal, my right hon. Friend is unable to make any statement on the matter.
  Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I will call attention to the matter to-morrow.

  NATIONAL INSURANCE BILL.

    AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS.
    Mr. HICKS BEACHasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he would put upon the Amendment Paper of the National Insurance Bill the proposed new clause dealing with the provision by the employer of the first six weeks of sick pay for agricultural labourers?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: My right hon. Friend still has this Amendment under consideration, but he hopes to be in a position to put it down at an early date.

    SHARE SYSTEM FISHERMEN.
    Mr. SUTHERLANDasked whether fishermen who are employed on the share system are to be exempted from compulsory insurance?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: If a fisherman remunerated on the share system is employed under a contract of service, he will be compulsorily insured. The position in particular cases will depend on the precise terms of the agreement under which the fisherman works.

    REGISTERED FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.
    Mr. MOUNTasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the number of registered friendly societies in Great Britain ensuring sick benefit which had at the period of their last return a membership of between 10,000 and 5,000, between 5,000 and 3,000, and under 3,000 respectively?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: My right hon. Friend regrets that through an oversight when the hon. Member put this down as an un-starred question some time ago it was not answered. His attention having been called to the omission, he has caused the desired information to be compiled, and it appears that there are fifty societies of between 10,000 and 5,000 members, fifty-five of between 5,000 and 3,000 and approximately 6,150 under 3,000.

    MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS AXD CHEMISTS.
    Mr. HOUSTONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that in most of the Continental countries it is illegal for medical practitioners to dispense and for chemists to prescribe; and whether he proposes to adopt the Continental system in the National Insurance Bill?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: I do not think an amendment of the law in the direction suggested would be in place in an Insurance Bill.

    SICKNESS INSURANCE ACT, GERMANY
    Mr. HOUSTONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has any official information as to the effect of the Sickness Insurance Act of Germany upon the interests of German doctors owing to the small pay or fees they receive under it, and showing that the medical treatment given to the insured is thereby prejudicially affected; and, if so, whether he will publish the same; and, if not, whether he will arrange for a Commission of British doctors to be sent to Germany to inquire into, and report upon, the working of the Insurance Act in that country?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: The German sickness insurance societies have had their own disputes with the doctor, and as a result are now paying higher fees than formerly, but there is no evidence to show that the medical treatment given to the insured is now unsatisfactory. No doubt the medical service is most efficient where the sickness societies and the doctor are satisfied with the contracts under which it is given.

  Super-tax on Dividend.
  Sir JOHN JARDINEasked, as regards the computation of income for the purpose of the Super-tax on dividend paid by a limited company free of Income Tax, whether the computation was only on the sum so paid over or on that sum plus the amount already paid by the company to the Inland Revenue as Income Tax; and whether any instructions had been issued for dealing with such cases?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: For purposes of the Income Tax (including Super-tax), income, whether taxable directly or at the source, is calculable in its full amount before payment of the tax, and dividends stated to be paid "free of Income Tax" form no exception.

  Land Valuation.
  Mr. PRETYMANasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he had made inquiries as to the alleged counting of hedgerow trees by the staff of the Valuation Department; and whether he could now give the House any information on the subject?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: As I explained in answer to the hon. Member on the 11th instant, the valuers follow the provisions of the Finance (1909–10) Act. In so doing they adopt, of course, the ordinary methods of valuation. No doubt it may often be convenient, without embarking upon the census of trees which the hon. Member appears to imagine is taking place, to note the number of trees in a hedgerow.
  Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Are we to understand that as the result of this inquiry the Treasury admits what the Chancellor of the Exchequer denies?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I promised a particular inquiry into this matter, and I find the practice has been that in the case of extensive woodlands they have taken a sample acre or two and the number of trees have been counted, and they have taken the remaining acres on that basis.
  Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: We are not talking about acres of trees, but about hedgerow trees.
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I thought I had made it clear that what takes place in the case of an average acre takes place in the case of an average hedgerow.
  Mr. PRETYMANasked how many estates are now awaiting valuation for
  1450
  probate; and how many have been waiting for more than twelve months?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I am not aware of the number of estates awaiting valuation for probate. In estates in which probate has been granted, a valuation of the realty is made for the purposes of Death Duty claims thereon, and investigations which fail to be made in the course of such valuation must necessarily take time. I understand that the number of cases awaiting valuation is somewhat above the normal; but now that the Valuation Department is better equipped and in working order, it is hoped that the valuations will be made expeditiously.
  Mr. PRETYMAN: Is it not possible to give a specific answer. If I put the question down again will the right hon. Gentleman answer it as to how many cases are now waiting and how many have been waiting for twelve months?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I will endeavour to obtain the information for the hon. Gentleman if he will put the question down for the day after to-morrow.
  Mr. KELLAWAYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to a suggestion that the valuation of land, under the Budget of 1909, might be utilised for the purpose of a land registry; and whether he sees any objection to such a course?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: His Majesty's Government have this suggestion under consideration.

  Congested Districts Board (Scotland) Report.
  Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAYasked the Lord Advocate what was the cause of the delay in the publication of the Congested Districts Board Report, and when would it be issued?
  The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Ure): The adjustment of certain matters of detail has unfortunately necessitated some delay in the publication of this report but I hope that it will be in the hands of hon. Members in the course of next week.

  Glasgow Assault Case (Delay in Passing Sentence).
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Lord Advocate whether his attention had been called to the fact that at the central police court, Glasgow, on Saturday, 15th July, John Carmichael, a member of the

  1451
  National Sailors' and Firemen's Union, was found guilty of an assault upon Police-Lieutenant Crawford, and that the stipendiary refused to pass sentence till 12th August; and whether, in view of the hardship involved by this delay, whereby the man was prevented from pursuing his avocation at sea, he would take steps to secure that the sentence was imposed at once?
  Mr. BARNEShad also given notice of the following question:—To ask the Lord Advocate if his attention has been directed to the case of John Cruikshank, who, in connection with the existing labour dispute in Glasgow, has been found guilty of assault on Police-Lieutenant Crawford and upon whom the stipendiary has refused to pass sentence till 12th August; if he is aware that Cruickshank desires to go to sea, and that the holding over of his case deprives him of the opportunity of earning his living; and if he can have the sentence declared at once or, otherwise, deferred till a later date?
  Mr. URE: I have made inquiry into the cases referred to in these two questions, but I have no authority to direct the stipendiary in a matter of procedure of this nature. I may, however, observe that in the circumstances stated it is open to Carmichael to apply to the stipendiary for a continuation of the case during his absence at sea.

  Cotton Growing (Nyasaland).
  Sir CLEMENT HILLasked whether any steps were being taken by His Majesty's Government to improve the land or water communications with Nyasaland in the interests of cotton growing?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Harcourt): I would refer the hon. Member to the statement which I made in the House on 20th July when he raised the point in the Debate on the Colonial Office Vote.

  Stann Creek Railway (British Honduras).
  Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONasked when the construction of the Stann Creek Railway in British Honduras was begun; what was the original estimate of the cost of the railway; what had been the actual cost to date; and who were responsible for the work of constructing the line?
  Mr. HARCOURT: It is somewhat difficult to answer the first part of the hon.
  1452
  Member's question since it was originally proposed that the Stann Creek Railway should have a smaller gauge than the 36-inch gauge which was finally adopted. The original estimate for twenty miles of this gauge was £62,877, but the length of the line was subsequently increased to twenty-five miles. Construction commenced in 1907, and up to the 31st March, 1911 (the latest date for which figures are available) the amount actually expended was $598,002, roughly £123,000. Considerable difficulties were met with in the course of construction. The work was carried out by a resident engineer under the supervision of consulting engineers in England.

  Sleeping Sickness (Uganda).
  Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any further report on the measures adopted for the suppression of sleeping sickness in Uganda (in continuation of Cd. 4990, of 1909) was in course of preparation, and, if so, when it would be presented; whether the report of the Government entomologist for Uganda, 1909–10, had yet been printed; and, if so, whether he would lay it before Parliament?
  Mr. HARCOURT: No further report is being prepared for presentation to Parliament, as information on all matters in connection with sleeping sickness is now made accessible to the public through the bulletin which is issued monthly by the Sleeping Sickness Bureau. The report of the Government entomologist for Uganda, 1909–10, has been printed in the Protectorate, and I shall be glad to send a copy of it to the Library of the House.

  Undeveloped Land Duty.
  Mr. PRETYMANasked whether an owner who is unable to develop his land owing to the Local Government Board's delay in approving a sewerage scheme is still chargeable with Undeveloped Land Duty, or whether he can be relieved from that duty until a scheme is approved?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: There is no provision for relieving an owner from any specific charge of Undeveloped Land Duty which may arise by reason of the circumstance alluded to. Such a circumstance, however, if it reduces the market value of the land, may equally operate to reduce or even, to extinguish the liability to duty.

  Indian Medical Service.
  Mr. KELLYasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether any posts in the higher grade of the medical service of India, hitherto reserved for military doctors, are now set apart for Indian civil doctors; if so, how many of them have been actually filled so far; and for what reasons are the other posts still closed to Indian medical practitioners?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Montagu): The answer to the first part of the question is no; the rest, therefore, does not arise.
  Mr. KELLYasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is yet able to state the annual cost to the Indian Treasury for the upkeep and education of Europeans and Eurasians for the military assistant-surgeon grade; and whether these ranks, are still closed to Indian doctors with university and registerable qualifications obtained at their own cost?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The answer to the first part of the question is no; to the second part, yes.

  Evicted Tenants Act.
  Mr. FRANCIS MEEHANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners would reconsider the application of John Farrell, of Gubanumera, on behalf of his wife, who was evicted on the Massey Estate, Darlery, county Leitrim, in 1897, for a grant to enable him to rebuild his house and stock his farm?
  The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): The Estates Commissioners are not prepared to depart from the decision they have already come to in this case not to sanction a grant.

  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  Mr. DORISasked whether the Marquess of Sligo intimated to the Congested Districts Board his willingness to sell his West Mayo estate to the Board under the Land Act of 1909, and that with a view to a sale he was having the necessary maps, etc., prepared for lodgment with the Board; what was the date of such intimation; have the maps and papers been lodged accordingly, or has any information been received from the landlord as to when they may be lodged; and can he state when the Board hope to be able to complete the purchase of this congested estate?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Marquis of Sligo intimated on 16th August, 1910, his willingness to sell his estate in county Mayo to the Congested Districts Board. The maps and other documents required have not been lodged, but the Board were informed in January last by the agent that considerable progress had been made in their preparation. The estate is a very large one, and the survey and preparation of maps and other documents must necessarily take some time. Negotiations for purchase cannot be opened pending the receipt by the Board of the maps and other documents.
  Mr. MEAGHERasked if the O'Brien Bradshaw and Amos representatives, Healy Estate, Johnstown and Folkscourt, county Kilkenny, is about being vested in the tenants; is he aware of the congestion on this estate, by reason of which a number of uneconomic landholders were debarred of the right of purchase because of inadequate security for the money to be advanced; is he aware that legal proceedings have been taken and judgment granted for possession of the holdings of some of those tenants which, if executed, will create discontent in this district; is he aware that upwards of 600 acres of untenanted land is in the occupation of the owners, let on the eleven months' system; and will he impress on the Estates Commissioners the desirability of acquiring this land for distribution amongst those uneconomic landholders and others entitled to portions thereof?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The hon. Member pro sumably refers to the estate of Louisa Amos and another, in resepct of which the owners have instituted proceedings for direct sale to their tenants under the Irish Land Act, 1903. The estate has not yet been reached in order of priority, and the Estates Commissioners are not therefore in a position to reply to the other matters referred to by the hon. Member, but when the estate is being inspected due inquiry will be made. The Commissioners have no information as to any legal proceedings which the owners may have instituted for the recovery of rent due by tenants who have not signed purchase agreements, nor have they any power to interfere with the owners' rights in this respect.
  Mr. J. P. FARRELLasked whether any further progress has been made by the Estates Commissioners as regards the sale of the John Edward Thompson Estate, at Clonfin, North Longford, and particularly

  1455
  as regards the purchase by the Commissioners of the untenanted lands on this estate, comprising some 400 acres of upland and bog, for division amongst the tenants and other suitable persons living on uneconomic holdings in the vicinity?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners inform me that this estate is one of those to be dealt with during the present year. It has not yet been inspected, but the Commissioners hope to have the inspection carried out at an early date.
  Mr. J. P. FARRELLasked whether any offer has yet been made by the Estates Commissioners for the purchase of the lands known as Prospect Farm, for the sale of which a petition has been presented by tenants residing on uneconomic holdings in the district; and, if not, whether he will request the Commissioners to communicate with Mr. R. H. Bond, Fany Hall, county Westmeath, on the subject immediately?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to his question of the 9th February last on this subject. The Estates Commissioners have not been furnished with the further particulars asked for.
  Mr. J. P. FARRELLasked whether any progress has recently been made towards the purchase by the Estates Commissioners of the lands of Coolcraff, barony of Granard, North Longford, which lands were more than a year ago offered for sale to the Commissioners by the landlord, Mr. James W. Bond; and what has been the result of these negotiations so far?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have had a preliminary inspection made of these lands with the view of enabling them to estimate the price which they could offer for them. Their inspector's report has been received and will be considered by the Commissioners.
  Mr. SCANLAN: asked whether the Corkhill and Corkamore grazing ranches, situated at Templeboy, county Sligo, on the estate of Sir Malby Croftyn, are in course of being acquired by the Estates Commissioners or by the Congested Districts Board; and whether numerous appeals have been made to the Commissioners and the Board by tenants of uneconomic holdings in the neighbourhood to have these ranches purchased and distributed for the relief of congestion?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The tenanted land on this estate is the subject of direct sale proceedings by the owner to the tenants under the Irish Land Act, 1903, and when, the property is being dealt with in order of priority the Estates Commissioners will consider the acquisition of the untenanted land referred to and the memorials which, have been received on the subject. The estate is not the subject of proceedings before the Congested Districts Board.
  Mr. VINCENT KENNEDYasked whether the Local Government Board for Ireland, in the case of old age pension appeals, obtain other valuations than those supplied by the pension officer, and,. if so, from whom?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Local Government Board are furnished by the pension officer with a list of the stock and crops obtained from the claimant and with his estimate of the claimant's total means. The claimant, moreover, is given an opportunity of stating his own estimate of means. The Board then put their own valuation on the several sources of income in detail, taking into consideration the situation and quality of the lands, and if the necessity arises also making supplemental inquiries through one of their inspectors.
  Mr. DUFFYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware of an inspection having taken place in connection with the Blake Foster Estate, Kinvarra; was it offered for sale to the Congested Districts Board; has any offer been made to the trustees for its purchase; and how does the estate stand at the present time?
  Mr. BIRRELL: This estate was offered for sale to the Congested Districts Board and has been inspected by their valuers, but the report of the valuers is not yet completed. The Board will consider the question of making an offer as soon as practicable.
  Mr. DUFFYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware of the number of uneconomic holdings to be found in the neighbourhood of Kinvarra, county Gal-way; whether, in order to assist in the relief of this congestion, Mr. Brady Murray, B.A., Moydore House, Kinvarra, offered some untenanted land to the Congested Districts Board; what was the extent or acreage of the untenanted land

  1457
  offered by Mr. Murray; and when is it proposed to take up this land and prepare a scheme for its allotment?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board are unable to state the number of uneconomic holdings in the neighbourhood of Kinvarra, county Galway. Mr. Brady Murray has offered 339 acres of untenanted land in Gort Union to the Board, and a decision will be come to regarding purchase as soon as practicable.
  Mr. DUFFYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can state if any correspondence has taken place between Miss M. L. Forster., Port House, Ruan, county Clare, and the Congested Districts Board in respect to the sale of her estate situated in Clare and Galway; is he aware of the extent of territory in possession of a gentleman named Mr. Melett on this estate; and, having regard to the state of congestion which exists in the vicinity of this grazing farm of Norman Grove, will he bring the matter under the notice of the Congested Districts Board so that they may take steps, if they have not already done so, to acquire this property?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board have been in communication with Miss M. L. Forster regarding the purchase of her estate in county Galway, comprising the farm of Norman Grove and four or five small tenancies adjoining, but an offer has not been made for the property, as the necessary documents have not yet been lodged. The Board have no knowledge of the letting to Mr. Melett, or of any estate of Miss Forster's in county Clare.
  Mr. FRANCIS MEEHANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he would state what progress the Congested Districts Board have made in reference to the purchase of the Parkes estate, Glencar, county Leitrim; whether a title claim lodged by Mrs. Haines would be considered; and whether, having regard to the number of evicted tenants and uneconomic holders in the district, and to the fact that the occupier of the waste lands on the estate has expressed his willingness to sell, the Board would take immediate action to relieve congestion in the district?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The maps and documents necessary to enable the Congested Districts Board to have an inspection of this estate have been lodged, and an inspection of the lands will be made and a decision come to regarding purchase as soon
  1458
  as practicable. The Board require the vendors to prove title before completing the purchase of estates.
  Mr. JOHN ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the lands, held by Mr. Charles O'Rourke on the estate of Sir Henry Grattan Bellew, county Galway, is to be dealt with by the Congested Districts Board, or have the Board entered into negotiations for the purchase of the said lands?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board are in negotiation for the purchase of the lands referred to.
  Mr. O'DOWDasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether negotiations are in progress for the purchase by the Congested Districts Board of the following estates in the county Sligo—namely, the Percival property, situate in the baronies of Corran and Leyny union, of Tubbercurry, and Mrs. Ellen O'Conor's estate, of Everlawn, Kilturra Electoral Division, same union; and, if so, can he state when a settlement is likely to be effected?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board inform me that the agent for the Percival Estate was written to, stating that if he desired to open negotiations for the sale of the estate through the Board he should lodge the necessary maps and documents. This has not yet been done. The necessary maps and documents in connection with Mrs. Ellen O'Conor's. estate have been lodged, and the estate will be inspected and a decision arrived at regarding purchase as soon as practicable.
  Mr. DORISasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Congested Districts Board or the Estates Commissioners have yet provided widow Sammon, of Carrow Kennedy, Westport, county Mayo, with a holding in lieu of the one from which she was evicted by the Marquess of Sligo; and, if not, when they hope to be able to do so?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Mrs. Sammon's name has been noted for consideration in the allotment of untenanted land acquired by the Estates Commissioners, but they have not yet been able to provide her with a holding. They have furnished the Congested Districts Board with particulars of her case so that the Board may, if a suitable opportunity arises, offer the Commissioners lands on which they could provide Mrs. Sammon with a holding. The Congested Districts Board have not pur-

  1459
  chased the Marquess of Sligo's estate, and have not, therefore, made inquiry into this case.
  Mr. DORISasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he could give the names of landlords in Mayo county who have agreed to sell their estates to the Congested Districts Board under the Land Act of 1909, and the names of those who have refused to do so or have not replied to requests addressed to them by the Board; and could he state when the Board intend to put the compulsory purchase clause of the Act into operation in the cases of Mayo landlords who have refused to sell?
  Mr. BIRRELL: 106 landlords in county Mayo have expressed their willingness to negotiate for the sale of their estates through the Congested Districts Board under the Act of 1909. Nine landlords stated that they were not willing to sell, and in ninety-one cases no replies were received, or the replies were indefinite. The question of applying the compulsory clauses of the Land Act, 1909, to the landlords who have refused to sell, has not been considered by the Board, having regard to the large number of estates which have been offered to the Board in the county Mayo.
  Mr. DORISasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he can state whether, pending the sale of congested estates in West Mayo, the Congested Districts Board will extend to the tenants of uneconomic holdings thereon the advantages afforded to occupiers of holdings on estates that have been purchased by the Board, enabling them to procure seeds and agricultural appliances at reduced prices, and to have instructions and demonstrations by the Board's officials?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The powers and duties of the Congested Districts Board relating to agricultural instruction were transferred to the Department of Agriculture by the Irish Land Act, 1909. In addition to the agricultural instructors employed under the ordinary schemes in county Mayo the Department have specially appointed for the congested districts of West Mayo a number of resident agricultural overseers to give instruction and to conduct practical field demonstrations in those districts. All small holders of land whether on estates purchased by the Congested Districts Board or otherwise, may avail themselves of the services of the
  1460
  overseers, and benefit by the special schemes put into operation for the supply of spraying machines, the improvement of live stock, and the supply of seeds and manures for demonstration plots. An experimental scheme for the sale of ordinary farm implements at reduced prices has been tried, and the question of extending this scheme and revising the special schemes for agricultural development of the congested districts, is at present under the consideration of the Department.

  Old Age Pensions.
  Mr. SCANLANasked whether in disallowing the old age pension awarded by the Skreen, county Sligo, sub-committee, to Martin O'Gara, of Carrenree, Dromard P. O., county Sligo, the Local Government Board had any evidence against the claim other than the absence of claimant's name from the Census Returns of 1841 and 1851; and whether he is aware that the subcommittee, in adjudicating on the claim, had before them the evidence of Pat Harte, a man of eighty-six years, and of Mr. Melvin, and had also seen the applicant, and had unanimously come to the conclusion that the applicant was qualified as to age; and whether, in view of the circumstances, the decision of the Local Government Board can be justified; and whether he will order a reconsideration of this case so that O'Gara may receive his pension, with arrears?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The hon. Member appears to be under a misapprehension as to the facts of this case. On 3rd June, 1910, the Skreen pension sub-committee, on a question raised by the pension officer as to O'Gara's age, disallowed the pension they had previously awarded. The pensioner then appealed to the Local Government Board, but failed to furnish any satisfactory evidence that he had attained the statutory age. He could not be traced in the Census Returns of 1841 and 1851, and the date of his marriage was 23rd July, 1874, at which date his age is reported by the pension officer to have been only twenty-one. The Board accordingly confirmed the decision of the sub-committee.
  Mr. SCANLANasked on whose appeal and on what evidence or representation of the facts the Local Government Board have stopped payment of the old age pension granted in January, 1909, to Mrs. Hennigan, widow, of Urlar, Carney, county Sligo; and whether he is aware of the fact that the local sub-committee who considered her claim and heard and

  1461
  investigated the evidence came to the unanimous conclusion that the applicant was qualified as to age and means and entitled to a pension at the maximum sum?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The pension officer raised a question as to Mrs. Hennigan's age, but the Carney pension sub-committee continued the pension as they considered that their previous decision allowing it was final and conclusive. The pension officer then appealed to the Local Government Board. Mrs. Hennigan, when asked by the Board for evidence as to her age, informed them that she was married in May, 1874, and asserted she was born on the 6th June, 1839, but produced no evidence in support of the latter statement. Her parents were traced in the Census Returns of 1841 and 1851, but her name did not appear in the list of the family in either of the records. The Board therefore in August last determined that she had not yet attained the age of seventy years.
  Mr. O'DOWDasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that Thomas Foley, of Clooneen, Geenagh, county Sligo, Ballyfarnon D. S. sub-committee district, has been deprived of the old age pension awarded him by the local committee; whether the Local Government Board disallowed this old man's claim on the grounds of no proof of age, although several old people of eighty-two years certified that they had known him to be over seventy; and, if so, whether, in view of the fact that sworn evidence can be adduced in support of this claim, the points in connection with it will be reconsidered?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Thomas Foley's first claim was disallowed by the pension subcommittee, but on his making a further application a pension was awarded to him. Against this decision the pension officer appealed. Certain persons claiming to be from seventy-five to ninety years of age expressed their belief that Foley was over seventy. His family, however, were found in the Census Return of 1841, but his name did not appear in the list of members. The Local Government Board disallowed the pension on the ground that he had failed to show that he had attained the statutory age. If he is in a position to furnish further evidence regarding his age, it is open to him to make a fresh claim.
  Mr. O'DOWDasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can state the grounds on which pensions have been withdrawn from Michael Curran, of Ballinashee, Geenagh, county Sligo, and John Cullen, of the same district, both residing in the Ballyfarnon (No. 2) sub-committee district of the county Sligo pension committee; whether these pensions have not been allowed because the names of these applicants could not be found in the Census Returns of 1841 or 1851, although it is a matter of general knowledge in the district that both are approaching the age of eighty; and, if so, whether, under the circumstances, their cases will be reopened?
  Mr. BIRRELL: In each of these cases the parents' family was traced in the Census Return of 1841, but the claimant's name was not recorded. Neither the claimants nor the persons making written statements on their behalf alleged that they were nearly eighty years old, though it is stated they are over seventy. No satisfactory evidence being forthcoming to show that the Census Return was wrong, the Local Government Board allowed the appeal in each instance on the ground that the claimant had failed to show that ho had attained the statutory age. When the Board have given a decision disallowing a claim, the case can only be re-opened by the lodgment of a fresh claim.
  Mr. FRANCIS MEEHANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he would state why was John Maguire, of Lattone, Kiltyclogher, deprived of his old age pension; and whether he having proven his age through affidavits from persons whose ages range from eighty-six to ninety-six years, and being a poor labouring man, is fully entitled to the benefits of the Act?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Maguire's age was given in the Census Return of 1851 as being four years, and he produced no satisfactory evidence to show that the record is incorrect. The Local Government Board accordingly allowed the appeals on the ground that he had failed to show that he had attained the statutory age.
  Mr. FRANCIS MEEHANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he would state on what grounds the Local Government Board refused to grant an old age pension to Ellen McTernan, of Tullynascreen, Dromahair, county Leitrim; and whether, having regard to the fact that the

  1463
  Manorhamilton sub-committee granted the pension on the sworn testimony of several old age pensioners and reliable witnesses, her case would be reconsidered with a view of granting her a pension with all arrears due since the date of her application?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Several aged persons certified that Ellen McTernan was seventy-three years old, and the claimant has herself stated she was that age. In her claim to a pension, however, she said she was born in July, 1840; and the Census Return of 1841 showed her parents as having been married in 1839, and recorded no child named Ellen in 1841. The Local Government Board accordingly disallowed her claim on the ground that she had failed to show that she had reached the statutory age. The Board are not empowered to reconsider their decisions.
  Mr. FRANCIS MEEHANasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of an old age pensioner named John Devaney, of Mulcan, Glencar, county Leitrini, who was granted an old age pension by the Manorhamilton sub-committee in July, 1909, but, on appeal by the pension officer, the Local Government Board disallowed it on the ground of means, but, on further inquiry by the Local Government Board's inspector, the pension was allowed in January, 1911, although no change had taken place in Devaney's means in the meantime, Devaney should now be paid the amount of his pension from July, 1909, to January, 1911?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I am making inquiries as to this case, and will communicate their result to the hon. Member.
  Mr. SCANLANasked whether the old age pension of William Maye, Lecarron, Skreen, county Sligo, Skreen sub-committee, was stopped for six months owing to a mistake made by the pension officer in regard to Maye's age; and whether, as he was shown by the Census returns, and other evidence, to have been qualified fully for a pension from the date on which his claim was passed by the sub-committee in October, 1910, he would be given payment of arrears for the said period of six months?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I am making inquiries into this case, and will communicate further with the hon. Member when they are complete.

  Ammunition B Mark VI.
  Viscount WOLMERasked the Undersecretary of State for War if he will state how much ammunition B Mark VI., dated 7th December, 1906, there is at Tipnor Ordnance; to what regiments it has been issued; and whether there are any other supplies of this ammunition, and, if so, how much?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Colonel Seely): There are 81,000 rounds of this ammunition in store at Tipnor, and about 66,000 in the possession of various units, a complete list of which has not yet reached the War Office. As regards other supplies of this ammunition the information is not readily available, and could only be obtained by calling for returns from all Ordnance depots.

  Supplies during Manœuvres.
  Mr. BECKasked whether, as the War Office intends, when practicable, to obtain supplies for the troops during the coming manœuvres from those residing within the manœuvre area, he will see that advertisements inviting tenders are inserted in the local newspapers, and that every possible facility is given to farmers, traders, and others to obtain information as to the produce required, and that he will also see that forms of tender are easily available for those desiring to tender?
  Colonel SEELY: The Supply and Transport Regulations contain instructions regarding the insertion in local and other papers of such advertisements, setting forth the address of the officer from whom tenders can be obtained, together with full information on the subject.

  Coronation Medal.
  Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH - COOKEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether it is intended to give a Coronation medal to the Territorials who were on duty at the investiture of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales at Carnarvon Castle; and whether a special medal will be struck to celebrate that historic occasion and distributed amongst the various units represented?
  Colonel SEELY: I am not aware that it is intended to grant a medal for the occasion in question.

  War Department (Minimum Wage).
  Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH - COOKEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to

  1465
  give the House the views of the Government with regard to the raising of the minimum wage for adult workmen employed under the War Department; and when the men employed at the Gun Wharf, Devonport, will be apprised of the change?
  Colonel SEELY: I hope to be in a position very soon to make a general statement on this subject.

  New Artillery Range (Candown Farm).
  Mr. PETOasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that farm buildings are being destroyed by shell fire at Lavington, Wilts, on. land acquired by the War Office for Artillery ranges, known as New Farm, Candown Farm, and the farm adjoining; and whether he is aware that, if tenders were asked for removal of building materials, considerable sums might be saved by the sale of material now being destroyed?
  Colonel SEELY: The farms in question are being used as targets for Artillery for the sake of the training obtained thereby, which is considered to be of more value than the small sum which might be realised by the sale of the materials.
  Mr. PETO: Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries what sums could be got say for the roofing material?

  Anglo-American Treaty (Great Britain and France).
  Sir WILLIAM BYLESasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is yet able to relieve public anxiety by a disclosure of the present state of the negotiations for an Anglo-American Treaty of Arbitration; whether he can confirm the announcement reported to have been made by President Taft that France has signified her desire to enter the Arbitration Treaty; and whether he concurs in the President's prediction that the treaties with Great Britain and France would be signed within ten days, and that within a few months the United States will be linked by arbitration treaties with four other nations?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: There need be no public anxiety as to the negotiations for an Anglo-American Arbitration Treaty. The discussion of points, rather of form than of substance, has taken some time, but I believe the two Governments are now practically agreed as to the terms. I can-
  1466
  not say anything as to negotiations between the United States and other Powers, of which I am not informed.

  THE PRIME MINISTER.
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith)entered the House at the close of Questions, and was received by his followers rising in their places and cheering. There were dissentient cries from other parts of the House.
  Mr. SPEAKER: I will ask hon. Members to control themselves.

  INDIAN HIGH COURTS [SALARIES].
  Committee to consider of authorising the payment, out of the Revenues of India, of the Salaries of any Judges or temporary Judges appointed under any Act of the present Session to amend the Indian High Courts Act, 1861 (King's Recommendation signified), To-morrow. — [Mr. Montagu.]

  NEW MEMBERS SWORN.
  Anthony John Charles Donelan, esquire, for County of Wicklow (East Wicklow Division).
  Cecil Bisshopp Harmsworth, esquire, County of Bedford (Southern or Luton Division).
  Lieutenant-Colonel Dennis Fortescue Boles, County of Somerset (Western or Wellington Division).
  John Muldoon, esquire, County of Cork (East Cork Division).

BILL PRESENTED.
  COTTON CLOTH FACTORIES BIIL.
  "To give power to make regulations with respect to Cotton Cloth Factories," presented by Mr. SECRETARY CHURCHILL; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed.

SALFORD HUNDRED COURT OF RECORD BILL.
MASTER of ELIBANKmoved, "That Mr. Gordon, Sir Frederick Low, and Mr. Joseph Pease be members of the Select Committee."
Mr. BOOTH: I object.
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member cannot object; but I will put each name separately, and he can divide upon that question.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Gordon be a member of the Select Committee."
Captain CRAIG: Which Mr. Gordon is it?
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Brighton.
Debate to be resumed To-morrow.

PARLIAMENT BILL.
Order read for consideration of Lords Amendments.
The PRIME MINISTER The PRIME MINISTER rose in his place to move "That the Lords Amendments be now considered," and was immediately assailed with Opposition cries of "Traitor."
Mr. SPEAKER: I must ask the two hon. Members sitting immediately above the Gangway not to interrupt but to pursue the ordinary Parliamentary practice. [HON. MEMBERS: "Name," and renewed cries of "Traitor."]
Mr. CROOKS: On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. After your ruling a moment ago an hon. Member sitting here— [HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down," and "Divide."] After your ruling as to the decencies of this House an hon. Member of this House—
Mr. SPEAKER: I have already appealed to hon. Members to afford the usual courtesy to the Prime Minister, and I am sure after my appeal that it will be granted. No doubt there is a good deal of excitement on both sides,' but the speakers will be heard in due course. I am sure hon. Members will find it in the interests of the House in general that the speakers should be listened to with as much attention as possible, and especially would I ask hon. Members sitting below the Gangway on either side not to interject interruptions. I have already asked hon. Members above the Gangway, and I hope they will fall in with my suggestion. I am now extending my appeal to hon. Members below the Gangway, and I would ask them, as this is a. serious occasion, to treat the occasion seriously and let the conduct of the House be worthy of its traditions.
Lord HUGH CECIL: On a point of Order. I was among those—
Mr. SPEAKER: Does the Noble Lord rise to a point of Order?
Lord HUGH CECIL: I rise to respond to your appeal. [Interruption.]
Mr. CHIOZZA MONEY: On a point of Order. [Interruption.]
Mr. SPEAKER: The best way to respond to my appeal would be to listen in silence.
The PRIME MINISTER and Lord HUGH CECILsimultaneously rose. [Interruption.]
Mr. SPEAKER: I would again ask the House to allow the Prime Minister to proceed.
The PRIME MINISTERagain rose. [Interruption.]
Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: On a point of Order—[Interruption].
Mr. SPEAKER: If hon. Members constantly rise to points of Order the Debate cannot proceed.
Several HON. MEMBERS (pointing at the Noble Lord the Member for Oxford University): Lord Hugh Cecil.
Mr. SPEAKER: I would also point out that nothing will create greater disturbance than to point to a particular Member.
The PRIME MINISTER The PRIME MINISTER rose in his place. [Interruption.]
Mr. SPEAKER: I must call on the Noble Lord (Lord Hugh Cecil) to desist from constant interruption.
Lord HUGH CECIL: Mr. Speaker, the right hon. Gentleman [Interruption] … King's name [Interruption] … House of Commons … [Interruption] has prostituted ordinary Parliamentary usage … [Interruption]. Therefore, there is no-discourtesy to him.
Mr. F. E. SMITH Mr. F. E. SMITH rose in his place [Interruption].
Mr. SPEAKER: The House has not yet heard what the Prime Minister has to say. It would only be according to the ordinary rules of courtesy to hear him.
Lord HUGH CECIL: This is not an ordinary occasion.
Mr. SPEAKER: The ordinary rules of courtesy are that hon. Members should hear what is said.
Mr. F. E. SMITH: On a point of Order. Am I and my Friend not entitled to apply treatment given to my right hon. Friend the Member for St. George's, Hanover Square (Mr. Alfred Lyttelton) if we think the Government has degraded the political life of the country?
Mr. SPEAKER: That is a precedent which should not be followed. [HON. MEM-BEES: "Hear, hear."]
Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: On a point of Order. [Interruption.]
Mr. SPEAKER: There is no point of Order. I have called on the Prime Minister.
The PRIME MINISTER: Mr. Speaker, In offering—— [Disorder.]
Sir E. CARSON: I beg to Move the Adjournment.
Mr. SPEAKER: I cannot take any notice of the Motion of Adjournment of the right hon. and learned Gentleman as we have not yet began on the Debate.
The PRIME MINISTER: This proposal— [Disorder.]
An HON. MEMBER: Write another letter.
The PRIME MINISTER: Once more— [Interruptions.]
Mr. SPEAKER: I should like to point out to such Members of the Opposition as are interrupting that it is far more important to them than it really is to the Government that free discussion should be preserved in this House, for they belong to the minority, who must be anxious that their views should be heard in this House. Surely, then, it is more important to them that the ordinary decencies and decorum of debate should be observed in this House. I appeal to the hon. Members to deal with this matter in a more serious light. [HON. MEMBERS: "We are serious."] Let hon. Members hear the arguments of the Government and the reply to them. Then the question can be put from the Chair.
Lord HUGH CECIL: The House is— [Interruption.]
Mr. SPEAKER: My appeal is that the decencies of debate shall be observed on both sides of the House.
The PRIME MINISTER: The principles, on which this Bill is drawn were all affirmed and approved by the House of Commons as long ago as the year 1907. [An HON. MEMBER: "It ought to have known better."]
Mr. CROOKS: Many a man has been certified as insane for less than half of what the Noble Lord (Lord Hugh Cecil) has done this afternoon.
The PRIME MINISTER The PRIME MINISTER— [Interruption.]
Mr. GOULDING: The whole thing depends on the Irish Vote. Let us have Redmond.
The PRIME MINISTER: This proposal then took its place in the forefront of the party controversy. It was debated on every platform in the country, and it became the predominant issue of the day. [HON. MEMBERS: "What about the Osborne judgment and Chinese slavery?" The new House of Commons— [Interruption.]
Mr. SPEAKER: I call on the hon. Member for Central Finsbury (Major Archer-Shee) by name to abstain from interruption.
Mr. REMNANTand other hon. Members of the Opposition: We are all of the same view.
Mr. SPEAKER: I want to point out to. hon. Members that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the City of London (Mr. Balfour) will probably follow the Prime Minister, and hon. Members will be anxious to hear what he has to say. What chance will there be for the right hon. Gentleman if the Prime Minister does not get a fair hearing? I am sure the House will be anxious to hear both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr. COOPER: Cannot we have the "Dictator" first?
4.0 P.M.
The PRIME MINISTER: In the new House of Commons, which met in February, 1910, Resolutions embodying all the detailed principles were carried in this House by large majorities; the Bill itself was introduced, and no one can doubt that but for the death of the King— [HON. MEMBERS: "Leave out the King: who killed him?"]— but for the death of the King and the temporary truce which ensued it would have been passed in that Session through all its stages and sent to

1471
another place. The constitutional Conference which followed proved that, with the best will, settlement by agreement was impossible. The Bill was then presented to the House of Lords in 1910.—[Interruption, and HON. MEMBERS: "Give it up."] It was laid aside in favour of an alternative scheme put forward by Lord Lansdowne on behalf of the responsible leaders of the Opposition, and in which, so far as the conflicts between the two Houses are concerned—
Mr. GOULD1NG: You said you would not hold office—you could not hold office without the Irish vote.
The PRIME MINISTER: We were to have the application of the Referendum. [Hon. MEMBERS: "Let the people decide." "Trust the people."] Another General Election followed in December, 1910. [Hon. MEMBERS: "On the old Register."] The electors of this country had before them— [Hon. MEMBERS: "Black bread."] —the Bill itself with all its details— [HON. MEMBERS: "And the Preamble."] the whole principle and machinery— [Hon. MEMBERS: "And the Preamble."] On the other hand, they had before them the counter proposals— [Hon. MEMBERS: "Limehouse."]— of the Opposition, which, especially with regard to the Referendum, were vigorously defended and as vigorously attacked in every constituency in the country. What was the result?
Mr. HAROLD SMITH: "Sods and souls." [An Hon. MEMBER: "That is from Lloyd George."]
The PRIME MINISTER: What was the result? The result was that for the Government in Great Britain we had some-think like sixty of a majority. That was in Great Britain. [Hon. MEMBERS: "What about England?"]
Mr. REMNANT: England is against you.
The PRIME MINISTER: In the United Kingdom as a whole we had something like 120. It is true to say of this Bill, and it would not be true to say of any other Bill in our Parliamentary annals—[An Hon. MEMBER: "It has not the support of the people."]—that it was the main issue of two elections. [Hon. MEMBERS: "NO, no," "Home Rule," and "Votes for women."] By no form of Referendum that could be devised could the opinion of the electoral body be more carefully ascertained.
Mr. CROFT: I thought you had a mandate for Free Trade. [An HON. MEMBER: ''American dollars.'']
The PRIME MINISTER: The Bill was before them in all its principles and machinery. The main purpose of these Amendments made in the House of Lords is in regard to matters of the gravest importance—[Interruption.]—to set that machinery aside and replace it by a new—[HON. MEMBERS: "When; when?" and interruption.]—by a new and worse edition of the very expedient which the electors when consulted had deliberately rejected. [An HON. MEMBER: "That is untrue."] It is a miss representation to say—[Interruption]— we should not be disposed to accept changes in the Bill which were consistent with its main principle and purpose. On Clause 1, in Committee, we consented to amend the Definition Clause, excluding— [HOST. MEMBERS: "Home Rule," and interruption]—all matters of local taxation and amplifying and rendering more precise the enumeration of the classes of Bills which alone were to be entitled to be in a relatively privileged position. In the same spirit, on Clause 2 we accepted an Amendment protecting the machinery against possible, though, as we thought, extremely improbable risks. In the Amendments made by the House of Lords—[Interruption.]
Mr. GOULDING: Your own forty creations "ratted"—
The PRIME MINISTER: Strangely described by a most reverend prelate as "safeguarding" Amendments, they were in effect, whatever may have been their intention, a substitution in the Bill in its main features of the alternative repudiated less than a year ago. [Interruption.] We should be prepared to ask the House of Commons even now—[Interruption.]—I see it is said in some quarters that these Amendments are not voluminous, and do not cover a great deal of paper, nor are they expressed in a large number of words. Some people say, indeed, that there are few verbal changes made by the House of Lords in the structure and form of the Bill as it left this House. That is not a very decisive consideration. It would require very few verbal changes to omission of the word "not," for instance, to alter the whole sense of the Bill.—[Interruption. HON. MEMBERS: "Redmond."]—Let me make good. [HON. MEMBERS: "You can-

1473
not make anything good."] [Hon. MEMBERS: "Redmond !"] The description I have just given.
Mr. GOULDING: You would not listen to us at all.
The PRIME MINISTER: As to the general effect of the Lords Amendments, their most novel feature was the creation of a new tribunal which was to be predominant over the House of Commons and over both Houses. [HON. MEMBERS: "Redmond."]—[Interruption, followed by loud cheering from the Ministerial side]— matters of great gravity should be considered by the electors of the country. [Hon MEMBERS: "YOU dare not consult the country."] I will not dwell on that —[Interruption.]—I will not dwell in detail—[Interruption.]—I will not degrade myself—by attempting to address arguments to Gentlemen who are obviously resolved not to listen, further than to state in two or three sentences the conclusion at which the Government have arrived, and to which, after due time has been given for deliberation, they are going to ask—the assent of the House of Commons. A situation has been created from which there is only one constitutional way of escape, and that is unless the House of Lords will consent to restore this Bill, if you like with reasonable Amendments consistent with its principle and purpose, we shall be compelled to invoke and exercise the Prerogative of the Crown. I am anxious not to do so, but if we are forced—it is the determination of the Government, and, as I believe, the vast majority of the people of this country, that without further delay this Bill should take its place on the Statute Book.
Question put, "That the Lords Amendment be now considered."
Mr. BALFOUR: I frankly regret that I have not been able to hear the speech of the Prime Minister. Everyone, I think, will understand that such a proceeding as that in which His Majesty's Ministers have indulged cannot but excite deep and passionate feelings in the great mass of the community. Nevertheless, my own view is that, however deep and however passionate be the resentment produced by any line of policy, however great and however just may be the indignation we feel for those who are responsible for it in this House, at all events it 'is desirable, I do not say that we should discuss these matters without heat, for that is impossible, I do not say that we should discuss
1474
them even without the expression of passionate feeling, for that is beyond the power of human nature, but at all events that we should discuss them. I think I heard the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary pass on me a very undeserved taunt. I remember well enough when he was the ringleader in a gang of disturbers on one occasion when no great constitutional issue was involved. It was merely a question whether one Minister or another should speak first in Debate. That, and that alone, and he kept my right hon. Friend (Mr. Lyttelton) standing for a whole hour without allowing one single interval in which he could speak a word. Whoever else has a right on that side, and there are Gentlemen on that side who have a right, to criticise adversely any disturbance of a Minister who speaks for the majority, certainly it is not the right hon. Gentleman. The Prime Minister urged again the often-told tale which does duty for history in the mouths of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite, and led us to believe that the country had over and over again given a distinct verdict upon the issue which now divides the two Houses. There never can be a greater political fiction. We think—we have never disguised our opinion—that the Bill, even as it came down from the House of Lords, is not the proper constitutional method of dealing with differences between the two Houses. We think, and we have always thought, that you began at the wrong end. We still think that your own professions should have had more weight with those who framed your Bill, and that you should have begun with the reform of the House of Lords and gone on to find some rational method of dealing with the differences between the two Houses rather than adopt the course you have in the Parliament Bill.
But at all events the Parliament Bill, in its main outlines has not been rejected by the House of Lords. They felt, I suppose, that in its main outlines there had been a great deal of popular support for the Bill, but there never was any popular support for the method of settlement of differences between the two Houses which you seem to consider is enough to justify a revolution. Remember that is what you are doing. The right hon. Gentleman almost seemed to assume that the Constitution has provided the method of the creation of peers at the bidding of a Minister as the ordinary legitimate issue of a deadlock between the two Houses. It is nothing of the kind. The right hon. Gentle-

1475
man, in bringing in the whole machinery of revolution to deal not with the Bill in its main principles but with one Amendment to the Bill, which he might have referred to the people in isolation if he had liked, has shown himself utterly regardless in mv opinion, of the greatest and most responsible duties which the adviser of the Crown has to perform. I should like to remind the House of what has occurred in our constitutional history with regard to this matter of the creation of peers to deal with the situation. The right hon. Gentleman had intended to deal with this aspect of the question, but he did not do so. May I remind the House of the way these revolutionary methods have been dealt with before. Twelve peers were created to bring about peace after one of the most sanguinary wars in which we ever engaged, a war, which so far as this country was concerned, had lost all its utility and which it was vitally necessary to bring to an end. I do not think the course was justified, but consider the occasion of the proceeding and compare the remedy which was thought to be pro vided by the Tory Government of that day. The object was to put an end to a war which ravaged Europe. The remedy was to raise a few eldest sons, and one or two gentlemen who were not eldest sons, to the peerage and increase the total number of the House of Lords by, I think, twelve gentlemen. That revolutionary course never was justified in later years even by its authors and, as for the Whigs of that day, may I read what the Whig House of Commons thought of it? They accused the Minister responsible for giving that advice in these words:
"He had prevailed on Her Majesty to exercise, in an unprecedented and dangerous manner, the invaluable and undoubted prerogative which the wisdom of the laws of this Kingdom has entrusted to the Crown for the reward of signal virtue and distinguished merit, by which desperate device he did not only, so far as in him lay deprive Her Majesty of the continuance of this wholesome counsel in a critical juncture but wickedly perverted the true and only end of that great and useful prerogative to the dishonour of the Crown and irreparable mischief to the constitution of Parliament."
That is what our ancestors thought, not of a revolutionary expedient like that which is actually proposed by the Government, but of a far smaller measure adopted in a far greater necessity and which is no true parallel for what is now being done. I quite admit that revolutions may be necessary. There was a great revolution 200 years ago and more in which the great majority of the country cordially concurred. It was the only issue
1476
from an absolute deadlock. It was one of the greatest episodes in our history, but this that the right hon. Gentleman is now invoking—this new tribunal—is entirely destroying the prerogative of the Crown and the independence of the Upper House. Both are done by this one stroke. He is misusing the prerogative of the Crown and destroying the independence of the Second Chamber, not to avert a great war, not to carry a measure which the masses of the people are passionately desirous of seeing passed into law, but for one object, and one object only, to prevent the people of this country expressing any verdict—any new verdict I ought to say—on a question on which they have twice expressed a verdict before—I mean the institution of Home Rule in the Sister Island. Was ever such a revolution suggested for such a cause? When such revolution has been tried, when it was actually carried in 1711, and when it was threatened in 1S32, at all events, there were great causes at stake, and it seemed impossible to find any other issue from a problem on which in one case the whole interests of peace and war were on one side, and on which in the other case—I mean the Reform Bill of 1832—it was abundantly and manifestly clear that the immense mass of opinion of all classes throughout the community was passionately desirous of seeing the Reform Bill carried into law.
What is the parallel now? Those who-recommended, or thought of recommending, the elevation of a few eldest sons to the Upper House trembled almost at the magnitude of the step they were taking in 1711, and bitterly repented it afterwards. The right hon. Gentleman with a light heart asks the Crown to do that which has never been done in the history of this country. He advises the Crown to do that which no Sovereign of this country has ever been asked to do before, and on an excuse so trumpery and so contemptible that it would not justify the making of a single peer, not even a baronet. I need hardly say I mean no insult to baronets. Here I should like to ask when was this advice given to the Crown, and in what circumstances? I notice in a paper devoted to the interests of the right hon. Gentleman and his friends—the "Morning Leader"—that Mr. Harold Spender says, with the confidence which usually, though not always I admit, betokens authentic information, states quite explicitly that these pledges were obtained before the last General Election. Whether that be true or not, is it not, at all events, clear from what

1477
we know has been happening—[HON. MEMBERS: "You have been had" and "Cheated."] If the hon. Gentleman means by that concise expression that it never entered my head that any Minister under such circumstances could possibly give such advice he is right. Whenever this advice was given, if, as I believe, it must have been given some months ago, at least whether Mr. Harold Spender be right or wrong in his particular date, at all events hon. Gentlemen have been thundering about the country during all that period against the hereditary principle, while the Prime Minister was carrying in his pocket a blank cheque for creating as many representatives of the hereditary principle as might suit him at the moment. He asked us to discuss in this House Clauses of this Bill, and he invited the Upper House to discuss the Clauses of the Bill as if they had been free agents, knowing all the time what they, of course, did not know, that at some remote date, under some unknown circumstances, he had advised his Sovereign to make him the absolute dictator. [An Hon. MEMBER: "I thought it was Redmond."] I say that it is almost incredible for a Government to come down in the middle of a crisis, in order to bring a crisis to an end, to ask for these unconstitutional powers. I think that is beyond pardon. But that he should in cold blood, months before the crisis arose, before they knew how it. would be used, and, above all, before the King could have known how it would be used— surely that will mark the present administration in the history of all administrations, as the one least sedulous to keep intact the treasure committed to them and most utterly regardless of all the duties which devolve upon the advisers of a Constitutional Monarch. It was an amazing, a most unqualifiable proceeding. What was the reason for it? The only reason—
The PRIME MINISTER: The right hon. Gentleman has not heard the reason because I was not allowed to state it.
Mr. BALFOUR: Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that he was prevented from stating why he had asked months ago, if that was the fact—
The PRIME MINISTER The PRIME MINISTER indicated dissent.
Mr. BALFOUR: I doubt whether he was going to deal with that.
The PRIME MINISTER: I was going, had I been permitted the courtesy never before refused the Leader of this House, to give a detailed and reasoned argument as to the grounds of the advice which His Majesty's Government have tendered to the Sovereign. [HON. MEMBERS: "When?"] I decline absolutely to answer any questions now. I was not allowed to do so. I was prevented by the right hon. Gentleman's Friends from doing so, and he has had the advantage of a courtesy which has been denied to me.
Mr. BALFOUR: I admit that that is the fact. I admit that hon. Gentlemen have listened to me with great courtesy, but I rather think I was not going to traverse the course of anything the 'right hon. Gentleman would, under happier circumstances, have laid before the House. I was going to give what I conjectured to be the reason of this course, and it is not a reason at all discreditable to the right hon. Gentleman or to those who act with him. I believe—I may be quite wrong— that this premature procedure was due to the right hon. Gentleman's conscience, and, after all, it would have been too cruel to introduce into the Coronation festivities any source of discord such as that which now must inevitably tear asunder all shades of public opinion. The right hon. Gentleman told us of the majorities which he thought supported his policy. He knows well enough that had this policy been announced before the Coronation festivities it would have been a most cruel trial to the Sovereign of this country, to know that by the advice of his Ministers he had been made the instrument of driving through a policy which the majority of Englishmen profoundly dislike, which nine-twentieths of the whole country violently dislike, and of which even then they did not know the full iniquity, because they did not know that the difference between the Houses had been narrowed down to this one question, practically— shall the people of this country or shall they not be consulted before a Single Chamber and an autocratic Ministry compel them to adopt a policy which they have twice rejected with indigation? The right hon. Gentleman talks of the Referendum, but he himself has been always careful to state that there are cases where the Referendum may properly be invoked, and his colleagues in the other House have maintained the same wise caution. Could there be a better occasion for settling the differences between the two Houses without a revolution, without compelling the King

1479
to destroy the whole system under which the House of Lords exists—could there have been a better case than that of referring to the people of this country this specific difference which divides them than the subject of Home Rule? By all means say that the people of the country were in favour of the general principle of the Bill. I will not argue the point. Grant it if you like. That is not the question. That has been passed a first time, a second time, and a third time in the Upper Chamber. [HON. MEMBERS: "NO."] The general principle of the Bill has unquestionably been passed. All you would have to refer to the people is not the principle of the Bill—take that, if you will, as decided— but the one point—which you think an adequate justification for destroying the Constitution—whether the country would or would not like to have some voice in the Home Rule Bill which is going to be brought in.
As it is, does the House realise what is the whole meaning of what the Prime Minister has done? He has arrogated to himself, by the advice which he has given to the Crown, powers which no Republican dictator in the world possesses. He has elevated himself on a pinnacle of arbitrary power which the President of the United States and the President of the French Republic would regard as utterly impossible. He has put himself above the Constitution. He has broken the spirit of the Constitution by tendering the advice to the Crown to make all the Peers necessary to carry a certain Bill; and by doing that he has placed himself and his friends above the Constitution. We now have it apparently, as the doctrine laid down on high authority by the whole Liberal party, and I need not say joyfully accepted by the Radical party and the Irish party, that it is within the province of a constitutional Minister to go to the Crown and say: "I am the Prime Minister of the day: I have the confidence of one Chamber: give me all the powers required to coerce the other." Tell me of any head of a State, any foreign King, President, or Prime Minister, or what you please, any executive head of a State, who has ever claimed or received from any free people power so intolerable as that?
The PRIME MINISTER: They are powers in the possession of every Tory Prime Minister.
Mr. BALFOUR: Can confusion of thought go further than that? The right
1480
hon. Gentleman actually wishes the House to believe, what I do not believe, that he is the dupe of so flimsy and shallow a sophistry. He arrogates to himself the power of making the House of Lords, by mere executive decree, exactly what he wishes it to be in respect of any particular measure. No Tory Prime Minister—
Sir WILLIAM BYLESmade an observation which was inaudible.
Mr. BALFOUR: I am very sorry I could not quite catch what the hon. Member has said. I was upon the subject upon which, if rumour speaks true, he may speak with some authority.
Sir WILLIAM BYLESmade another remark which was inaudible.
Mr. BALFOUR: And on which he will be able to express an opinion perhaps in a few days in a more peaceful atmosphere, but unfortunately I have been prevented from catching the full gist of his remarks. I quite understand, everybody will understand, that it gives satisfaction to a majority to impose its will for the time being. Therefore, from that point of view I suppose, everybody I am addressing on the other side looks on the step of the Prime Minister with satisfaction. I cannot believe that everybody I am addressing looks at it with satisfaction if he will consider its ulterior consequences. I cannot believe that some of the excellent Gentlemen above the Gangway who have honoured me with their attention really think that the Constitution is improved by laying it down that it is just and right that the Sovereign should be required by the advice of his Prime Minister to flood the Upper House whenever it suits the convenience of his party. There are two parties in the House which, I suppose, do congratulate themselves not merely upon the immediate issue of the controversy, but upon its ulterior consequences. There is the Labour and the Radical party below the Gangway opposite, and they always have, whether they quite know themselves or not, a strong liking for a central tyranny under a democratic form, and nothing more carries out such a scheme of Government than the policy now pursued by the Government, which has all the airs of a House of Commons elected by the people, a Prime Minister having the confidence i the House of Commons, the Prime Minister tendering advice to the King, and all through the attractive formulae which come so glibly to our tongues, but which

1481
pre-eminently and essentially creates the Prime Minister, or rather the Cabinet of the day, into a tyrannical junta. I am sure that hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway have a certain sneaking liking for that form of Government, and some even cherish the view, perhaps rightly, that the time may come when this new theory of the Constitution may be the accepted one, and when they who sit for the time being the transient and fleeting occupants of that Front Bench, may, while they are there at all events, exercise a tyranny quite unknown either to this Constitution or to any other free Constitution in the world. But after all the real heroes on this occasion—
Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLmade an observation which was inaudible.
Mr. BALFOUR: I think that the hon. Gentleman when a constitutional issue is raised cannot easily remain silent. The real heroes of the engagement are there. They have waited long. They have waited patiently; and they have been successful. What have they waited long for? [An HON. MEMBER: "Home Rule."] What they have waited long for is to find the British parties so divided that they hold the balance. What they have patiently desired through all these years is that position which they now hold, and which they are now using with such remorseless dexterity. It is no invention of contemporary controversy to enunciate the doctrine which I have just stated, because I have heard it a hundred times from those very benches. I have heard representatives of the Irish party say the time will come when the two parties will not either of them be in an absolute majority. I have heard Mr. Gladstone lament the necessity; I have heard Mr. Gladstone foretell the dangers. A generation has passed; the moment has come; the foreseen dangers are upon us, and hon. Gentlemen above the Gangway, as well as we here, may think they belong to a party triumphant for the moment. They are for the moment, with us, the defeated party, and well they know it. Hon. Gentlemen who hold the balance between us have issued their decrees that the Constitution shall be trampled upon and the Crown dragged into the dust, and they have been humbly and obsequiously obeyed.
Those who boasted, and rightly boasted, of the advantages of a flexible Constitution that moves and changes according to the necessity of the times, never foresaw
1482
that that Constitution would become the mere plaything of contending factions in this House as it is now. They never for a moment thought that the technical rights, the prerogative, of the Sovereign, misused by the Minister of the day, would entirely subvert and uproot the ancient Constitution of this country. I do not think that that state of things can be permanent. I do not think that that is even conceivable. But it is a sad and tragic thought, when the ancient Constitution of this country has thus under the advice of this Government been brought to ruin, that we know that it is not the sense and the feeling and the constitutional view of those who sit on that bench that have determined the issue. We know that in this respect, if in no other, they are the puppets of forces which they cannot control and cannot resist. It has been in the power of hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway, who have never protested love, either for the United Kingdom or for the Constitution under which the United Kingdom has grown and flourished, to compel the Ministers of the Crown to abuse the confidence which the Sovereign reposes in them, and to compel him to break an immemorial tradition and to destroy and utterly subvert the real principles on which the Constitution of this country for all these centuries has stood unshaken.
5.0 P.M.
The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey): I beg to move "That the Debate be now adjourned." The right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has had extended to him the courtesy of a majority of the House which was not extended to the Prime Minister. Under those circumstances, he himself can hardly expect that his arguments will carry weight or will seem of importance in face of the scene which we witnessed before he arose. Never did a leader of a party, with a majority in the House of Commons, have behind him more chivalrous personal loyalty and more united political support than my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has at this moment. The feelings of the majority are deep and strong on this question, as well as those of the minority. Hon. Members opposite may easily imagine whether those feelings are less strong after the scene we have just had. So far as it was personal discourtesy to the right hon. Gentleman, the Prime Minister, every one of us resents it. The right hon. Gentleman spoke of the ulterior

1483
consequences of our action. What are to be the ulterior consequences of conduct such as that of this afternoon? They are ulterior consequences which undermine and destroy the House of Commons. The Prime Minister has announced the course of the Government. If arguments are to be used in support of that course they are arguments to be used by the Prime Minister as representing all of us. If arguments are not to be listened to from him, there is not one of us who will attempt to take his place. It is for the minority to decide whether they are willing to listen to arguments; it is for us, the majority, to decide by whom those arguments must be presented. If they will not hear the arguments of the Prime Minister they put an end to Debate in this House, and the ulterior consequence of such action, unless it be controlled, and if it be repeated, must be to bring the Debate to an end. The Prime Minister has announced the course which the Government propose to take. That is all that is necessary for us to do this afternoon. He has announced that course, and the majority of the House has demonstrated its opinion upon that course and its feeling with regard to it. I trust on some future occasion that even the most extreme section of the minority may feel that it is the House of Commons which is at stake when the Debate is resumed; but, for the moment, we have nothing that we can do now but to endorse the course which the Prime Minister has announced, which we are all prepared to do, and I propose that our proceedings this afternoon should close by moving the adjournment of the Debate.
Mr. F. E. SMITH Mr. F. E. SMITH rose to speak, but was met with continued interruption during five minutes, and did not obtain a hearing.
Mr. SPEAKER: I beg to remind the House—
Mr. HUNT: On the point of Order—
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member will perhaps allow me to finish my sentence. I beg to remind the House of Standing Order 21, which is as follows:—
"In the case of grave disorder arising in the House, the Speaker may, if he thinks it necessary to do so, adjourn the House without question put, or suspend any sitting for a time to be named by him."
1484
In my opinion a case of grave disorder has arisen, and, under the authority of the rule, I now adjourn the House.
Adjourned accordingly at Eight minutes after Five o'clock.

  Legal Aid to Prisoners.
  Legal Aid to Prisoners.
  New Stamps.
  New Stamps.
  Customs Statistical Office (Overtime).
  Customs Statistical Office (Overtime).
NATIONAL INSURANCE BILL.
  GOVERNMENT WORKERS.
  GOVERNMENT WORKERS.
  IRISH CONTRIBUTIONS.
  IRISH CONTRIBUTIONS.
  Reinstatement of Evicted Tenants.
  Reinstatement of Evicted Tenants.
  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  School Attendance (Gilford, County Down).
  School Attendance (Gilford, County Down).
  Old Age Pensions.
  Old Age Pensions.
  Maxim Gun Equipment.
  Maxim Gun Equipment.
  Injured Yeoman (Claim).
  Injured Yeoman (Claim).
  Deptford Victualling Yard.
  Deptford Victualling Yard.
  Damage to Fishing Tackle.
  Damage to Fishing Tackle.
  Fair-Wages Clause (Dowlais Ironworks).
  Fair-Wages Clause (Dowlais Ironworks).
  Indian Gold Standard Reserve Fund.
  Indian Gold Standard Reserve Fund.
  Christian Names.
  Christian Names.
  Motor Omnibus (Mud Splashing).
  Motor Omnibus (Mud Splashing).
  Case of Bessie Carter (Warwickshire).
  Case of Bessie Carter (Warwickshire).
  Wandsworth County Court.
  Wandsworth County Court.
  Trial of Mary Nash.
  Trial of Mary Nash.
  Esperanto Congress.
  Esperanto Congress.
  Labour Exchanges (Trade Disputes).
  Labour Exchanges (Trade Disputes).
  Railway Accident (New Wandsworth).
  Railway Accident (New Wandsworth).
  Central Telegraph Office.
  Central Telegraph Office.
  Post-Office Sorters (Foreign Section).
  Post-Office Sorters (Foreign Section).
  Trunk Telephone Exchange Operators.
  Trunk Telephone Exchange Operators.
  Dundalk Post Office Doctor.
  Dundalk Post Office Doctor.
  Glasgow Assault Case (Delay in Passing Sentence).
  Glasgow Assault Case (Delay in Passing Sentence).
BARONIES OF BURGH, STRABOLGI AND COBHAM.
Petition of Alexander Henry Leith that he may be permitted to refer in the evidence and in the printed case to the Proceedings in the case of Sarah Otway Cave claiming the title and dignity of Baroness Braye; read, and referred to the Committee for Privileges.
EARLDOM OF OXFORD.
Petition of Sir John James Hugh Henry Stewart Murray, K.T., Duke of Atholl, Marquess and Earl of Atholl, Marquess and Earl of Tullibardine, Earl of Strathtay and Strathardle, Viscount Glenalmond, Balquhidder, and Glenlyon, Baron Murray of Tullibardine, Lord Balquhidder, Balvenie, and Gask in Scotland, Baron Strange of Knockyn in England; Earl Strange, Baron Percy and Baron Murray of Stanley, County Gloucester in Great Britain; Baron Glenlyon of Glenlyon in the United Kingdom, praying their Lordships that upon proving to their satisfaction that Miss Amelia Georgiana Murray Macgregor is in too infirm a state to allow her to appear at the Bar of their Lordships' House, their Lordships will be pleased to order and direct a Commission to be issued, directed to a fit and competent person or fit and competent persons as Commissioner or Commissioners, to examine on oath and take the evidence of the said Miss Amelia Georgiana Murray Macgregor touching the premises, viva voce or otherwise as their Lordships may direct; read, and referred to the Committee for Privileges.

BARONY OF LATYMER.
Petition of Francis Burdett Thomas Money Coutts, now called Francis Coutts of Stoodleigh, Tiverton, in the County of Devon, praying their Lordships that, upon proving to their satisfaction that Sir William James Farrer, Knight, is in too infirm a state to allow him to appear at the Bar of their Lordships' House, their Lordships will be pleased to order and direct a Commission to be issued, directed to a fit and competent person or fit and competent persons as Commissioner or Commissioners, to examine on oath and
622
take the evidence of the said Sir William James Farrer, Knight, touching the premises, viva voce or otherwise as their Lordships may direct; read, and referred to the Committee for Privileges.

LORD ST. AUDRIES.
The Right Honourable Sir Alexander Fuller-Acland-Hood, Baronet, having been created Baron St. Audries of St. Audries in the County of Somerset—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
LORD STAMFORDHAM.
Lieutenant-Colonel the Right Honourable Sir Arthur John Bigge, G.C.V.O., K.C.B., K.C.S.I., K.C.M.G., having been created Baron Stamfordham of Stamfordham in the County of Northumberland—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.

LORD MERTHYR.
Sir William Thomas Lewis, Baronet, K.C.V.O., having been created Baron Merthyr of Senghenedd in the County of Glamorgan—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
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 has been complied with:
Corporation of London (Bridges).
Also the Certificates that no further Standing Orders are applicable to the following Bill:
Local Government Provisional Order (No. 15).
And also the Certificate that the Standing Order applicable to the following Bill has been complied with:
Severn Fisheries Provisional Order.
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Report from, That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the
Salford Hundred Court of Record Bill
ought to be dispensed with:
Read, and agreed to.

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE CORPORATION BILL.
  CHISWICK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
  Reports from His Majesty's Attorney-General received and ordered to lie on the Table.
CHESTER WATER BILL. [H.L.]
Commons Amendments considered and agreed to.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE CORPORATION BILL.
  CHISWICK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
    ST. HELENS CORPORATION BILL.
    Moved, That the Order made on the 29th day of March last, "That no Private Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after the 4th day of July next," be dispensed with, and that the Bills be now read 2a; agreed to: Bills read 2a accordingly.
LUTON CORPORATION BILL.
Read 3a (according to order), with the Amendments: Further Amendments made: Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE CORPORATION BILL.
Committed: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
CHISWICK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
ISLE OF MAN CUSTOMS BILL.
Brought from the Commons.
POULTRY BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
HORNSEA URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
  GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY BILL.
  Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.
LORD ACTON'S NATIONALITY BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to remove doubts as to the nationality of Richard Maximilian Baron Acton and his issue—Was presented (on Petition): Then it was moved by the Chairman of Committees, That the order made on the 29th day of March last, "That this House will not receive any Petition for a Private Bill later than Tuesday the 9th day of May next unless such Private Bill shall have been approved by the High Court of Justice, nor any Petition for a Private Bill approved by the High Court of Justice after Thursday the 11th day of May next" be dispensed with in respect of the said Bill, and that the Bill be now read 1a; agreed to: Bill read 1a accordingly.
PORT OF LONDON (FIRST ELECTION OF MEMBERS) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Moved, That the Order made on the 29th day of March last, "That no Provisional Order Confirmation Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after Tuesday the 4th day of July next," be dispensed with, and that the Bill be now read a second time; agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (GAS) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (GAS) (No. 2) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order): Bills reported without amendment, and to be read 3a To-morrow.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 11) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order): The Amendments proposed by the Committee made: The Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow.
DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
House in Committee (according to order): Bill reported without amendment, and to be read 3a To-morrow.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 5) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order): The Amendments proposed by the Committee made: The Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 8) BILL.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 9) BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order): Bills reported without amendment, and to be read 3a To-morrow.
PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDER (No.3) BILL.
Read 3a (according to order), with the Amendments and passed, and returned to the Commons.
PUBLIC HEALTH (IRELAND) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order): Bill reported without amendment, and to be read 3a on Wednesday next.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE CORPORATION BILL.
Report from the Committee of Selection that the Five Lords appointed a Select Committee on the Rotherham Corporation Bill and other Bills do form the Select Committee for the consideration of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation Bill; read, and agreed to: All petitions referred to the Committee, with leave to the Petitioners praying to be heard by Counsel against the Bill to be heard as desired, as also Counsel for the Bill.

ISLE OF MAN CUSTOMS BILL.
Read 1a, and to be printed. (No.145.)
House adjourned at a quarter before Five o'clock, till To-morrow, Three o'clock.