Sitting of 29 July 1912

Preamble
The House being met, the Clerk at the Table informed the House of the unavoidable absence of Mr. Speaker from this day's Sitting:—
Whereupon Mr. WHITLEY, the Chairman of Ways and Means, proceeded to the Table, and, after Prayers, took the Chair as Deputy-Speaker, pursuant to the Standing Order.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Great Northern Railway Bill [Lords],
Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Midland Railway (London, Tilbury, and Southend Railway Purchase) Bill [Lords],
To be read the third time To-morrow.
Rhymney Valley Sewerage Board Bill [Lords],
Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Bordon and District Gas Bill [Lords],
As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
Ericht Water and Electric Power Bill [Lords] (King's Consent signified),
As amended, considered:—
Ordered, That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time.—[The Deputy-Chairman.]
Bill read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Nottingham Mechanics Institution Bill [Lords],
As amended, to be considered To-morrow.
West Riding of Yorkshire Asylums Bill [Lords] (by Order),
Consideration, as amended, deferred till To-morrow.
South Suburban Gas Bill [Lords] (by Order),
As amended, considered; Amendments made:—
Ordered, That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time.—[The Deputy-Chairman.]
Bill accordingly read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
North Killingholme Pier Bill [Lords] (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till To-morrow.
Glasgow Corporation Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],
Consideration deferred till To-morrow.
Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [Lords],
Read a second time, and committed.
Ordered, That Standing Order 211 be suspended, and that the Committee have leave to sit and proceed on Thursday.—[The Deputy-Chairman.]
Bishoprics Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 296.]
Bankruptcy Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 297.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to,—
Glasgow Boundaries Bill, with Amendments.

BOARD OF EDUCATION.
Copy presented of Statistics of Public Education in England and Wales. Part I. Educational Statistics, 1910–11 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
Copies presented of Three Orders in Council, dated 19th July, 1912, under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
WINTER ASSIZES ACTS, 1876 AND 1877.
Copies presented of Seven Orders in Council, dated 19th July, 1912, constituting Winter Assize Counties Nos. 1 to 7, for the purpose of the ensuing Winter Assizes [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD. (IRELAND).
Copy presented of Annual Report of the Local Government Board for Ireland, for the year ended 31st March, 1912 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
MINES AND QUARRIES.
Copy presented of General Report for the year 1911 by the Chief Inspector of Mines. Part I., District Statistics [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF DURHAM).
Copy presented of Order made by the Council of the County of Durham altering the Polling Places for the township of Pelton, in the Chester-le-Street Parliamentary Division [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT, 1911.
Copies presented of Orders made by the Scottish Insurance Commissioners under Section 78 of The National Insurance Act, 1911, with reference to the constitution of Insurance Committees for the burghs of Perth, Kilmarnock; county of Inverness; burghs of Govan, Stirling, Partick, Dundee; counties of Peebles, Kincardine; burghs of Greenock, Coatbridge; county of Sutherland; burghs of Edinburgh, Leith, Aberdeen; counties of Forfar, Banff; burghs of Wishaw, Arbroath; counties of Caithness, Haddington, Dumfries; burgh of Dumfries and Maxwell-town; county of Renfrew; burgh of Falkirk; county of Linlithgow; burgh of Dunfermline; county of Fife; burghs of Dumbarton, Glasgow, Inverness, Paisley; counties of Ross and Cromarty, Bute; burghs of Rutherglen, Airdrie; counties of Clackmannan and Kinross, Elgin and Nairn, Aberdeen, Stirling, Dumbarton; burgh of Ayr; counties of Zetland, Berwick, Midlothian, Lanark, Kirkcudbright; burgh of Kirkcaldy; counties of Roxburgh, Orkney; burgh of Hamilton; county of Wigtown; burgh of Motherwell; counties of Argyll, Ayr, Perth, Selkirk; burgh of Clydebank [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD.
Copy presented of Forty-first Annual Report of the Local Government Board for 1911–12; Supplement containing the Report of the Medical Officer for 1911–12 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
Copies presented of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 4957 and 4958 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
PUBLIC RECORDS (HOME OFFICE).
Paper laid upon the Table by the Clerk of the House:—Copy of Schedule (superseding Schedules previously submitted to Parliament), containing a List and Particulars of Classes of Documents existing or accruing in the Office of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department, which are not considered of sufficient public value to justify their preservation in the Public Record Office [by Act.]
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  Peruvian Amazon Company.
  Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Mr. Julio Cesar Arana, a director of the Peruvian Amazon Company, Limited, in liquidation, is a British subject?
  The UNDER - SECRETARY for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Acland): So far as I am aware the answer is in the negative.

  Foot-and-Mouth Disease.
  Mr. CRUMLEYasked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he was aware that thirty-five cattle, the property of Martin Cassey, were in a field at Carlisle from 28th June; that two Board inspectors visited the cattle daily, and, on the 20th July, these inspectors pronounced one of these cattle to be suffering from foot-and-mouth disease; that Inspector Barry was called in to inspect the cattle, and that he certified these cattle to be free from foot-and-mouth disease; and whether, under these circumstances, the Department would compensate Martin Cassey for his loss?
  Mr. MONTAGU (for the President of the Board of Agriculture): My right hon. Friend is aware of the circumstances of Mr. Cassey's case, and much regrets the loss and inconvenience which he, in common with so many stock owners, has suffered by reason of the restrictions on movement imposed to prevent the spread, of foot-and-mouth disease. But my right hon. Friend has no power to compensate him out of public funds.
  Mr. CRUMLEY: Were the inspectors who condemned these beasts only market inspectors and not veterinary surgeons, and is it generally the case throughout England that the market inspectors who are visiting these farms and condemning cattle are men who know nothing at all about the disease?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I am not able to give the hon. Member an answer to his question, but I have to repeat that my right hon. Friend has no power of paying compensation out of public funds, which is only given when animals are destroyed.
  Mr. CRUMLEY: Were the two inspectors who condemned these beasts for foot-and-mouth distemper men who were not veterinary surgeons, as should be the case with the men sent to inspect these animals, and were they not men who knew nothing about the disease?
  Mr. MONTAGU: That is a question which I am not able to answer, but I will communicate the point which the hon. Member raises to my right hon. Friend.
  Mr. KILBRIDE: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that most of these inspectors are market inspectors employed by the local authority, and that in several instances they are small tradesmen who know nothing whatever about cattle?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I am not aware of that. I will bring the hon. Member's allegations to the notice of my right hon. Friend.
  Sir JOHN SPEARasked the President of the Board of Agriculture if he will consider the desirability of directing the Research Committee it was proposed to send abroad to investigate the origin and cause of foot-and-mouth disease in cattle to proceed to deal with the disease in this country, now that unfortunately we have it amongst our herds; whether he will consider the probability of such a step being more likely to discover a practical preventative and remedy, suitable and effec-
  1602
  tive, having regard to the climate and conditions in this country, than would be likely to accrue from investigations conducted abroad; and would not the investigation be conducted in this country at much less expense?
  Mr. MONTAGU: My right hon. Friend adheres to his intention of sending a Committee of Inquiry to India as soon as possible to conduct a scientific investigation into the origin and causes of foot-and-mouth disease. In this country the disease is fortunately only epidemic, and as soon as an outbreak occurs the energies of the Board are directed to stamping it out as completely and quickly as possible. The opportunities of studying the disease here are therefore not sufficient for the thorough investigation which is proposed. The question of providing an experimental station has been considered, and, if the investigation could by that means be safely carried out in this country it would doubtless be less expensive; but experience has shown that there must always exist some risk of the spread of infection from the experimental station, and my right hon. Friend is not prepared to incur the danger of such a calamity for the sake of a comparatively small pecuniary saving.
  Mr. BATHURST: Is it proposed to defer sending this Committee of Inquiry out to India until the chief veterinary officer of the Board is ready to accompany it?
  Mr. MONTAGU: As I told my hon. Friend the other day certain members of the Committee are going to India to begin the work in the autumn, whether the chief inspector is there or not.
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked whether any fresh outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred during the last three days; how many outbreaks have now occurred in Great Britain since the recrudescence of the disease; and what are now the prospects of successfully stamping it out?
  Mr. MONTAGU: Two further outbreaks of disease occurred on Friday in the Cheshire area in the immediate vicinity of the farm at which it was discovered on Thursday last; two, on adjoining farms, at Chollerton, in the Northumberland area, on Saturday last; and one yesterday in the Somerset area, close to the farm on which the disease originally broke out. The total number of outbreaks is now fifty-six. As regards the outlook, the characteristics of the disease are such,

  1603
  as the hon. Member is aware, as to make prophecy more than usually difficult, but the measures which the Board have adopted have so often proved efficacious in the past, and all concerned are working so well, that there is no reason at present to despair of the result. The essential thing is that any suspicion of the existence of disease should be reported immediately to the police by the persons in charge of stock.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: Is it not the fact that the stamping-out process has never taken place in the case of such a serious outbreak as this has turned out to be?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I cannot answer that question, but I will tell my right hon. Friend what the hon. Member says.
  Mr. STANIER: Can the hon. Gentleman say anything as to the origin of this outbreak?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I am afraid that I can give no information further than that already given.
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, in view of the risk of foot-and-mouth disease being conveyed from one farm to another by hares and rats, as mechanical carriers, he has considered, or will consider, the desirability of the organised destruction of such animals when known to be plentiful in areas scheduled as infected?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The possibility of the conveyance of infection by hares and rats is kept steadily in view, and in some instances in which disease has broken out rat-catchers have been employed. But the organised destruction of these animals throughout a scheduled area would be attended with considerable difficulty, and it is probable that more harm than good would result by reason of the fact that many of them would be driven to outlying places to which they would not ordinarily resort. The assembly and movement of persons for the purpose would also be a source of danger.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that hares are particularly prevalent in the area where the disease now exists in Somerset?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I am sure my right hon. Friend will be very pleased to receive any information on such a subject.

  Agriculture Produce Trade.
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked why the usual sections relating to imports and exports of agricultural produce and trade in live stock with Ireland are omitted from Part III. of the Official Agricultural Statistics for 1911; and whether and, if so, when these further statistics will be published?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The statistics as to imports and exports formerly published in Part III. of the Agricultural Returns will in future be published separately as Part IV., which is now in the Press, and will be issued shortly. The change was made in order that the statistics as to prices and supplies at markets might be published at an earlier date than was formerly the case, and also to enable persons interested to obtain them at a smaller cost. The change was fully explained in the Prefatory Report to Part I.

  Agricultural Landholders (England and Wales).
  Sir JOHN SPEARasked what was the number of persons occupying agricultural land in England and Wales in the year 1911; the number of such persons whose holdings were less than five, ten, twenty, and fifty acres each in extent, respectively; the number of owners of agricultural land in the same year; and the number of owners whose holdings did not exceed five, ten, twenty, and fifty acres in extent, respectively?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The number of separate agricultural holdings exceeding one acre in England and Wales in 1911 was 435,310. the number of holdings exceeding one and not exceeding five acres was 92,748, and the number of holdings exceeding five and not exceeding fifty acres was 199,740. The number of holdings which were owned or mainly owned by the occupiers was 54,176, of which 14,800 did not exceed five acres and 25,032 exceeded five but did not exceed fifty acres. My right hon. Friend regrets that he is unable to supply the other particulars asked for.

  Labour Exchanges (Buildings).
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANSasked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he can give particulars of the sum of £51,500 appearing in

  1605
  the Civil Services Supplementary Estimates as the sum required for urgent and unforeseen works (in addition to the sum of £3,000 required for the same purpose in the original Estimates) in connection with Labour Exchanges and Unemployment Insurance buildings, and also particulars of the sum of £16,000 appearing in the same Supplementary Estimates for urgent and unforeseen works in connection with the National Health Insurance buildings?
  Mr. WEDGWOOD BENN (Lord of the Treasury): The sum of £51,500 is required to complete the adaptation of about eighty new Labour Exchanges in London and the provinces. It also includes provision for a large number of small works in connection with Unemployment Insurance. The number of new Labour Exchanges required is found to be much larger than was expected when the original estimate was framed. The sum of £16,000 contains provision for the preparation of additional accommodation for the Insurance Commissioners in England, Scotland, and Wales, the full extent of which is at present unsettled. It also includes provision for such further works of adaptation, etc., as may be found necessary in the premises already in occupation.

  Contract System (H.M. Office of Works).
  Mr. POINTERasked if the staff of general cleaners in the two Houses, approximately forty in number, are employed by Simpsons, engineers, Grosvenor Road; whether, although nominally employed by Simpsons, they take their orders from the resident engineer of the lighting and ventilating Department; whether some of the staff have never seen the firm of Simpsons; whether the length of employment of these men ranges from eighteen months to twenty-seven years; whether, if one man takes a few days' holiday, although the rest of the staff perform his work among them, his pay is stopped during that period; whether he will consider if the interests of the Department would best be served by a system of direct labour by the Department; and, if not, what are the advantages of the contract system?
  Mr. BENN: The Board have endeavoured to secure, as far as possible, continued employment for the men engaged through their contractors, and it is generally arranged when a change of contractor takes place, that men such as those employed in the Houses of Parliament
  1606
  shall be taken over from the old contractor by the new. The staff is fixed at such a number as to provide for temporary absence of men from work through illness, etc., and, in case of emergency or extra pressure of work, additional men would, in the ordinary course, be taken on. It has been the opinion of the Department that the contract system tends to greater economy and efficiency.
  Mr. J. WARD: Would not the hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of reducing the percentages taken by the contractors in order to increase the wages of these men under the contract system?
  Mr. BENN: There is a further question on that point, and perhaps the hon. Gentleman will wait.
  Mr. POINTERasked whether the clerks of works under the Department are only employed as temporary hands, although some of them have been employed for twenty years; and whether the hon. Gentleman will appoint to the staff all these men who have served ten years or more?
  Mr. BENN: All the clerks of works who have a fixed location are on the established staff. The clerks of works employed on new buildings are temporary owing to the fluctuation in number of new buildings. There are eleven temporary clerks of works with as much as ten years' service. Six of these are above the limit of age usually fixed for entry to the establishment.
  Mr. POINTER: What is the reason why these men are kept on the temporary staff from year to year when they are doing satisfactory work?
  Mr. BENN: The men are kept on the temporary staff because the number of buildings fluctuates.
  Mr. POINTER: When the men are sent from job to job, is not their position evidently permanent?
  Mr. POINTERasked how the employment of the men engaged on repair and maintenance work by a contractor is more efficient and economical than direct employment by the Office of Works; whether the saving is effected in the wages or conditions of labour of the workmen; if so, whether the cost of putting these men on the establishment would be largely, if not entirely, met by the profits of the contractors; and whether the hon.

  1607
  Gentleman is aware that practically no progressive local authority puts such work out to contract?
  Mr. BENN: The opinion referred to is based on the experience of the Department. As the contractor is bound by the Fair-Wages Resolution, no economy is effected at the expense of the workmen. It must be remembered also that the contractor pays for the insurance of workmen in respect of compensation for injuries, the indemnification of the Department in respect of third party claims for injuries or damage, the provision of tools and plant, clerical work, etc.
  Mr. J. WARD: Does the hon. Gentleman's answer suggest that the contractor does not charge the fullest possible premium for the indemnity given by the Department for these purposes?
  Mr. BENN: I only say that the percentage to which the hon. Member refers covers the charges which were thought necessary.
  Mr. W. THORNE: May I ask whether the contract work is done under schedule?
  Mr. BENN: The work is measured work and the rest of the work it what is called day work.
  Mr. POINTER: Will the hon. Gentleman answer the latter part of the question, "whether the cost of putting these men on the establishment would be largely, if not entirely, met by the profits of the contractors."
  Mr. BENN: Obviously, that question cannot be answered until it has been decided what is to be the amount of wages paid to the men.
  Sir J. D. REES: Have the men complained of their terms of service?
  Mr. BENN: No complaints have been made to me.

  Renfrew Road Workhouse.
  Mr. WEDGWOODasked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the attempted suicide of Julia Neil because she was parted from her children and sent to a different workhouse; whether it is against the regulations that mothers should be parted from their children when driven by hunger into the workhouse; and why the regulation is not carried out at Renfrew Road workhouse?
  The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Burns): I have made inquiries into this case. As my hon. Friend is aware, it would be altogether contrary to present policy for adults and children to be permanently placed in the same Poor Law institution; but the regulations—which I do not find have been contravened in the present case—provide that, while adults and children are to be, as far as practicable, accommodated in different premises, opportunities are to be afforded to a mother for seeing her children at reasonable intervals.
  Mr. WEDGWOOD: Is it in accordance with the regulations of the Local Government Board to separate a mother from her child, although she does not want to be separated from it?
  Mr. BURNS: Under certain circumstances, yes. In the case to which the hon. Member refers, the child had ringworm rather severely, and the mother had to be separated from the child.
  Mr. WEDGWOOD: Is this mother back to her child, or is she still locked up?
  Mr. BURNS: No. I am sorry to say that this poor woman unfortunately has had to be sent to Long Grove Asylum.

  Hammersmith Workhouse.
  Mr. LANSBURYasked whether six years ago, when the Hammersmith Workhouse and Infirmary were built at an expenditure of upwards of a quarter of a million pounds, the Local Government Board sanctioned the placing of the mortuary in such close proximity to the ambulance attendants' dwelling that the ventilators of the mortuary are within eight feet of its windows, and that the Local Government Board inspector has lately pronounced the condition and position of the mortuary to be unsatisfactory and in hot weather seriously to affect the rooms inhabited by the ambulance attendant and his family; and, if so, will the President of the Local Government Board explain why this was not seen to be so at the time when the plans of the infirmary were being sanctioned by the Local Government Board?
  Mr. BURNS: The position of the ambulance attendant's cottage was determined by the guardians, who were acting under the advice of an eminent firm of architects, and it was not anticipated at the time the mortuary was erected that any unpleasantness would arise owing to its proximity to

  1609
  the cottage. Attention having now been drawn to the matter, I have approved some alterations which I hope will at a small cost remove the grounds of complaint.
  Mr. LANSBURY: Is it not the fact that the Local Government Board approved the plans of an eminent firm of architects who originally designed those buildings?
  Mr. BURNS: It may be so.

  Civil Service Candidates (Sight Tests).
  Mr. WILLIAM THORNEasked the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that a number of Civil Service candidates during the last appointment, having been passed by the medical examination, have had to pay £1 1s. to an occulist for a sight test, and have not been entitled to any information whatever as to the result; and whether any steps can be taken to have the money refunded to candidates whose eyesight was found to be satisfactory?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Masterman): It is the duty of the Civil Service Commissioners, under Clause 3 of the Order in Council of 10th January, 1910, to satisfy themselves that every candidate for their certificate "is free from any physical defect or disease which would be likely to interfere with the proper discharge of his duties." In some cases the report of the first doctor leaves some doubt as to the fitness of the candidate in respect of eyesight or hearing, and a further examination by a specialist is found to be necessary. The fees for such examination are paid by the candidate, with whom it rests to satisfy the Commissioners as to his physical fitness. It is not the practice of the Commissioners to inform candidates of the contents of the medical reports on which their decision is based.

  Courtown Pier, County Wexford.
  Sir THOMAS ESMONDEasked the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that the Chief Secretary for Ireland has requested the Board of Works to draw up plans for a pier that they have suggested at Courtown, county Wexford, and that they have refused to do so; and if he will instruct the Board to comply with the wishes of the Irish Government without further delay?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The hon. Baronet appears to be under a misapprehension. The Board of Works have supplied the
  1610
  Irish Government with all the particulars in their possession relative to the pier at Courtown Harbour. Applicants for Grants from the Development Fund must draw up their own plans in the first instance.
  Sir T. ESMONDE: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire of the Chief Secretary whether he asked the Board of Works to draw up plans for this particular harbour, and, if so, what the answer was? And if they refused, will the right hon. Gentleman instruct the Board to supply the plans to the Chief Secretary?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I think I have given the answer, but I am willing to make further inquiries into the matter.

  Government Buildings, Dublin.
  Mr. BRADYasked when it is proposed to resume and complete the construction of the new Government buildings in Upper Merrion Street, Dublin?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The commencement of actual building operations on the site is contingent on the vacating of certain of the houses thereon at present used as offices. It is expected that these offices will be vacated in January next, after which building operations will be proceeded with on the site. Tenders for the new buildings are being invited at once, and the declared contractor will be required to proceed with the preparation of the stonework, joinery, and steelwork as soon as the contract is signed.

  Valuation (Ireland).
  Mr. HORNERasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will lay upon the Table copies of all the instructions, rules, and regulations issued from time to time by the Treasury to the Chief Commissioner of Valuation in Ireland and to other valuers in Ireland in reference to valuations under the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910; and of all the instructions, rules, and regulations issued from time to time by the Chief Commissioner of Valuation in Ireland to his subordinates in reference to valuations under the same Act since it came into operation?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: No instructions, rules, or regulations have been issued by the Treasury to the Chief Commissioner or to other valuers in Ireland in reference to Valuations under the Finance (1909–10)

  1611
  Act. The instructions, rules and regulations issued by the Commissioner of Valuation to his subordinates are of a purely technical nature, and are generally similar to those issued by the Inland Revenue Commissioners to their Valuers in England. I do not see that any advantage would be gained in laying these, which are very numerous, on the Table of the House, at any rate before they are considered by the Committee which is to be appointed to inquire into the methods of valuation under the Act.

  Marconi Agreement.
  Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONasked the First Lord of the Treasury when he proposes to invite the House to approve of the agreement between Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Company and the Post-master-General with regard to the establishment of Imperial wireless stations?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for HOME AFFAIRS (Mr. McKenna): Probably tomorrow night, but the Noble Lord opposite and the Patronage Secretary are in consultation with regard to the matter.
  Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSON: Is there any special need for haste in the matter in view of the fact that the Agreement cannot be approved by the Colonial Governments concerned for several months?
  Mr. McKENNA: I think the hon. Member should address himself to the Postmaster-General on that point.
  Sir HENRY NORMAN: Will the Marconi Agreement be discussed after eleven o'clock to-morrow?
  Mr. McKENNA: I am not certain whether it will be discussed to-morrow or not.
  Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSON: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it scarcely fitting that an Agreement involving commitments of this size should be taken after eleven o'clock?
  Mr. McKENNA: I did not say that it would be taken after eleven o'clock, but that it might be taken to-morrow.

  GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND BILL.

    POSTAL SERVANTS (IRELAND).
    Major ARCHER-SHEEasked the Prime Minister whether any representations have been made to him by postal ser-
    1612
    vants in Ireland as to their future conditions of service if the Government of Ireland Bill were to become law; whether, if these representations have been received, they indicate apprehension as to the prospects of these postal servants; and what steps he proposes to take to safeguard their future prospects?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Herbert Samuel): I have been asked by the Prime Minister to answer this question. Representations of the nature indicated have been made both to the Prime Minister and to me, and I have invited a deputation of the staff concerned to place their views before me.
    Major ARCHER-SHEE: In the event of the Government of Ireland Bill becoming an Act, will these officials be allowed to retire on compensation if they so desire?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: Under certain circumstances, yes.

    Industrial Disputes.
    Lord ROBERT CECILasked the Prime Minister if he will say what steps, if any, the Government propose to take to minimise the probability of industrial disturbances between the present time and the introduction of the Government Bill on that subject, which cannot take place before April or May next at the earliest?
    Mr. McKENNA (for the Prime Minister): Legislation on this subject requires to be maturely considered, and in the meantime the Government will, when the circumstances call for it, exercise such powers and such influence as they can appropriately use for the maintenance of industrial peace.
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: Has not this subject been before the Government with a view to legislation ever since, at any rate, the beginning of this year and under these circumstances, and seeing that the Chancellor of the Exchequer promised to deal immediately with this matter, is it reasonable to defer it till May or June of next year?
    Mr. McKENNA: My right hon. Friend did not say immediately. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh! oh."]
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: He said, "the immediate future." [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh! oh."]
    Mr. McKENNA: I can add nothing to the answer already given to the Noble Lord. It is not a matter which can be settled hurriedly. I do not think the Noble Lord is quite right when he says that a proposal of this kind has been before the Government since the beginning of this year.
    Mr. LANSBURY: In view of the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that the Government are ready to take action when the circumstances demand that that action should be taken, is he aware that the dock strike is still continuing, and that fearful suffering is being caused by it, and does he not think that the circumstances of the present moment demand that the House of Commons should take instant action to bring this terrible deadlock to an end in the East End of London?
    Mr. McKENNA: I will report to the Prime Minister the views expressed by my hon. Friend.
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: Has the right hon. Gentleman considered that strikes are threatened in all directions, as we know from the daily Press, and do the Government really intend to move in the matter? [HON. MEMBERS: "Wait and see."]
    Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: A matter of this kind ought to be dealt with in Debate.

    Education (Provision of Meals) Act.
    Mr. JOWETTasked the Prime Minister if he will give facilities at an early date for passing the Education (Provision of Meals) Act into law?
    Mr. McKENNA: I fear it is not possible to afford facilities before the recess, though, as I have already stated, the Government are favourable to the principles of the Bill.

    National Food Supply.
    Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the financial burden thrown upon the community for its protection, not against successful invasion but against starvation in the event of war, owing to four-fifths of the food of the people coming from abroad and of the fact that in the opinion of agricultural experts three-fifths of such foods, representing seven months' supply in every year, could be grown in this country if the public burdens upon agricultural land were less
    1614
    heavy and there was greater security felt by farmers as to the continuous possibility of growing wheat at a profit upon the steadily shrinking area under arable cultivation, he will consider the advisability in the highest national interests, in lieu of the further taxation of agricultural land, of applying half the value of a battle cruiser every year, either by way of bonus or of exemption from taxation, in the direct encouragement by the Government of wheat cultivation in the United Kingdom?
    Mr. McKENNA: I do not consider that the adoption of the course suggested by the hon. Member would be in the best national interests, nor can I accept all the assumptions on which the question is founded.
    Sir GILBERT PARKER: May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman considers the request inconsistent with Liberal policy in view of the fact that the Government has already approved of subsidies for fruit-growing in Jamaica; subsidies for Imperial purposes—according to the Postmaster-General—for a railway in Canada; and subsidies for—
    Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: That is a matter for argument at the proper time.

    High Court of Justice (Cases Entered for Trial).
    Mr. HUME-WILLIAMSasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the totally inadequate progress which the King's Bench Division of the High Court has recently been able to make with the cases entered for trial in that division; and whether he is now able, before the courts adjourn, to make a statement as to what, if any, steps are to be taken to deal with the arrears on the Common Law side of the High Court of Justice?
    Mr. McKENNA: A statement will be made on this subject before the House adjourns for the recess.

    Customs Watchers (Committee).
    Mr. ASTORasked whether, in October, 1911, a Committee was appointed to inquire inter alia into the conditions of employment of Customs watchers; and whether, as a result of the Committee's investigations, any improvement has been made in their conditions of employment, and, if so, in what respect?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The Report of the Committee has been presented to the House, and its recommendations as to the watchers have been approved by the Treasury.

    Royal Navy (Non-Continuous Service Men).
    Mr. ASTORasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will state if it is the intention of the Board of Admiralty to consider the pay, position, and pension of the non-continuous service men (officers, stewards, and cooks) of the Royal Navy with a view to the improvement of their terms of employment?
    The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Churchill): The position of this class will be considered in connection with the general question of the pay of naval ratings.

    Loss of Steamship "Titanic" (Rescue).
    Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDasked the President of the Board of Trade if he can say why the same recognition and rewards were not accorded to the crew of the "Carpathia" who rescued the "Titanic" survivors as to the crews of the ships of war who rescued the people on board the "Delhi"?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Robertson): The two cases were not of the same kind. In the case of the "Delhi" the rescuers incurred great risk to life, and my right hon. Friend was therefore in a position to recommend His Majesty to award to them the medal for gallantry in saving life at sea, which is only granted in cases in which personal gallantry has been displayed, accompanied by actual risk to life. In the case of the "Carpathia" the service rendered was worthy of the highest commendation, and expression has already been given by the Prime Minister to the appreciation of this service by His Majesty's Government. It was not, however, a service involving such risk to life as to bring it within the conditions attached to the grant of Board of Trade medals for gallantry.

    Hertzian Wave Fog-Signals.
    Mr. FREDERICK WHYTEasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has now received information regarding the French experiments with Hertzian wave fog-signals?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: The Board are informed by the Trinity House that they have not yet received any further information from the French Lighthouse Authorities in regard to the experiments. The Trinity House state that they have no reason to suppose that any experiments have yet been made, but that they are communicating with the French Lighthouse Authorities on the subject.

    Admiralty Contract, Glasgow (Fair-Wages Clause).
    Mr. BARNESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will make inquiry as to the wages paid by the firm of M. Walker and Company, Gowanbank Foundry, Glasgow, Government contractors, and, if he finds that they are paying 17s. 6d. per week, if he will give instructions that the Fair-Wages Clause must be complied with?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): The firm in question do not appear to hold any direct contract with the Admiralty at present. I will endeavour to ascertain whether they hold any sub-contract. In the meantime, if my hon. Friend has any specific information which he can communicate to the Admiralty, I shall be glad to consider it.

    Royal Dockyards.
    Mr. BARNESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is yet in a position to give an assurance that the stonemasons at Rosyth are all working in accordance with the conditions as to hours and wages agreed to between the employers and employed associations?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to the masons employed by Messrs. Thorburn, in regard to whom he put a previous question on the 16th May last. Fifteen stonemasons have been permitted at their own request, made on account of the times of the trains running to their homes, to work fifty-five hours per week instead of fifty. They receive payment for these fifty-five hours at the ordinary time rates.
    Mr. JOHN WARD: Do we understand, therefore, that by these means the contractors evades the responsibility of paying extra?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: No, the matter is one of some doubt. This is under the old

    1617
    Fair-Wages Resolution, and is a contract that was signed before the March Resolution, 1909. These fifteen men live at a distance from their work, and they asked to be allowed to go on with some work while waiting for the train. They were therefore paid at the time rate. I am seeking advice, as the matter is one of doubt.
    Mr. BARNES: Have any negotiations taken place with the union, and has the arrangement been made with their consent?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: That I cannot say. But the men, instead of hanging about for the train, asked permission to work. I am not prepared at the present moment to say quite how the matter of the pay stands.
    Mr. PETO: Are we to understand that it is seriously contemplated taking away all liberty of individual action?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: My answer conveyed no meaning of that sort.
    Mr. BARNES: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this evasion has been carried out in spite of the protest of the trade union for the last three or four months?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: If my hon. Friend will give me the case I shall be glad. I have no information upon that point.
    Mr. FELLasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state how much has been spent on new dockyard construction by the Governments of this country and of Germany during the past ten years?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: The information asked for by the hon. Member is being prepared by the Department but is not yet available; and I must ask him to postpone his question for a week.
    Sir JOHN SPEARasked whether or not the carpenters and the shipwrights of the Royal Navy are to be considered for a rise of pay, out of the £60,000 provided in the Estimates last week?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: The reply is in the negative.

    Peruvian Amazon Company, Limited.
    Mr. KINGasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that Mr. Julio Cesar Arana is the liquidator and administrator of the Peruvian Amazon Company, Limited, in
    1618
    liquidation; whether he has power to cancel his appointment as liquidator; and, if he has such power, whether he will consider the propriety of exercising it?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I understand that Mr. Julio Cesar Arana has been appointed liquidator of the Peruvian Amazon Company, Limited, by a resolution of the company. Under Section 186 (IX.) of the Companies Consolidation Act, 1908, it is provided that in a voluntary winding-up the Court may on cause shown, remove a liquidator. An application for this purpose, however, can only be made by a shareholder or creditor of the company.
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: Is the effect of the information given by the hon. Gentleman that Mr. Arano is in control of the whole of the operations of the Peruvian Amazon Company, and is not Mr. Arano one of the gentlemen incriminated in the statements in the Blue Book?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I am not aware of that; my information only goes to the extent of my answer.
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: Does not the liquidator control the affairs of the company? Is not this man the liquidator?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: If the Noble Lord will put down a question I will make inquiry.
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: May I ask if the Government will, if necessary, promote a short Bill to remove Mr. Arano from the position?
    Mr. KING: May I ask whether the hon. Gentleman will read the report of Sir Roger Casement in order to fully understand the character of Mr. Arano?

    Great Western Railway (Ireland).
    Mr. LYNCHasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the discrepancies in the system of freights instituted by the Great Southern and Western Railway Company as between Dublin and Limerick and between Dublin and Ennis and other towns in county Clare, arrangements will be made to group Ennis with Limerick, in accordance with the promise made by the Great Southern and Western Railway Company at the time of amalgamation?
    Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDalso asked the President of the Board of Trade

    1619
    if he has received representations as to the rates charged to Ennis by the Great Southern and Western Railway Company, Ireland; and if he will give this matter his attention, in view of the importance of the matter to the traders and people generally of the county Clare?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I have received representations on this subject, and have been in communication with the Great Southern and Western Railway Company, who are consulting the other companies concerned with a view to the reduction of certain rates to which attention was called. The Board will not lose sight of the question, and I will inform my hon. Friends of the result in due course.
    Mr. W. REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentleman's Department bear in mind that this matter is pending for a long time, and that an early settlement is of the greatest importance?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: Yes, it will be borne in mind.

    Pilotage Bill.
    Sir GILBERT PARKERasked the President of the Board of Trade if, as he has previously stated, no change has taken place in international agreements or circumstances since 1906 which could affect the decision of the Law Officers of the Crown made in regard to the Merchant Shipping Bill of that year, he will say whether the position of alien pilotage remains where it was in 1888, when the Select Committee reported that in bestowing pilotage certificates on aliens this country was giving that for which she obtained, in the majority of cases, no reciprocal advantages from foreign Powers, although the Committee interpreted maritime treaties with foreign Powers in the sense that these Powers engage to give reciprocal advantages which have never been given?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: My right hon. Friend is afraid that he cannot make the position clearer than he did in his reply to the hon. Member on Monday last. There is no ground, so far as he is aware, for the suggestion that foreign countries have engaged to give us certain advantages which they are now withholding.
    Sir G. PARKER: May I ask the hon. Gentleman if it is not the case that the Committee decided in that direction, and
    1620
    that the Government took that into consideration?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I will investigate the question.
    Sir G. PARKERasked the President of the Board of Trade whether the frequency exemption Clause, No. 10 in last year's Pilotage Bill, was in excess of the recommendation of the Departmental Committee?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: The principle embodied in Clause 10 was based on the recommendations of the Pilotage Committee. As the hon. Member is aware, owing to the practical difficulty affecting the pilots raised by this Clause, it does not reappear in this year's Bill.
    Sir GILBERT PARKERasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, as against the French contention that the effect of Section 73 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1906] has been to impose on certain French vessels higher charges than those imposed on British vessels in the same circumstances, he will point out to the French Government that the only charge which could be imposed on French ships consequent on Section 73 would be in relation to compulsory pilotage, and that some of the most eminent judges of the British Admiralty Court have decided that compulsory pilotage is not a charge upon vessels but a regulation instituted for their benefit; and whether he will refer the French Government to the decision of Dr. Lushington, in the case of the "Hanna" in 1866, that compulsory pilotage was not a charge within the meaning of an international convention as to ship charges, and to the decision of Sir Robert Phillimore, in the case of the "Vesta" in 1882, approving of the previous case?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: The hon. Member may rest assured that all appropriate and relevant arguments were used by the British delegates in the recent discussions with the French representatives. In the particular circumstances of the case, my right hon. Friend does not think that the argument suggested in the question could have been effectively used to combat any of the contentions advanced on the French side.

    Coal Mines (Minimum Wage) Act.— Warwickshire Board.
    Mr. NEWDEGATEasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, at

    1621
    the forthcoming meeting of the joint district board for Warwickshire, formed under the Coal Mines (Minimum Wage) Act, under the chairmanship of Sir Walter Lawrence, the secretary of the North Warwickshire Miners' Association will be granted the right of representing to the meeting the claim of the members of that association to receive adequate representation on that joint district board; and whether he will be permitted to be accompanied to 'that meeting by such other representatives of the North Warwickshire Miners' Association as that trade union may desire?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: The proceedings of the meetings of the Joint District Board for Warwickshire are under the control of that body; but I have no reason to think that the representatives of the North Warwickshire Miners' Association will not have their case fully considered at a meeting which has been specially called to consider it, and of which they have had notice.
    Mr. NEWDEGATE: Will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to ask that these men shall be called before the Board so as to make their own representation?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I shall see whether it is necessary.
    Mr. NEWDEGATE: Will the right hon. Member make representations to the Joint Board that these men shall be permitted representation?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I have undertaken to make inquiries.

  NATIONAL INSUEANCE ACT.

    ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISES.
    Mr. GODFREY LOCKER-LAMPSONasked what steps were taken to ensure the lease of premises for the purpose of administration of the National Insurance Act being effected at as reasonable a cost as possible?
    Mr. BENN: Every precaution was taken to ensure that these buildings were acquired at the least possible cost. The inquiries and negotiations were conducted by responsible officers very experienced in such work. It may safely be said that every building in London which was at all suitable and which was for sale or hire at the time was fully and carefully considered. The final decision was made in consultation with the officials concerned.

    TUBERCULOSIS.
    Mr. ASTORasked (15) how many small-pox, fever, and other hospitals had been inspected by the Local Government Board with a view to providing accommodation for insured persons suffering from tuberculosis and recommended for institutional treatment before 15th July; and how many have been inspected since then; (16) how many beds in small-pox, fever, and other hospitals had been approved by the Local Government Board as being suitable for insured persons suffering from tuberculosis and recommended for institutional treatment before 15th July, and how many have been approved since then; and if he will further state how many of these beds were empty and available for insured persons on 15th July, and how many are now empty and available?
    Mr. BURNS: If the hon. Member will allow me, I will reply to this and the following question together. As I informed the hon. Member on Thursday last, the Local Government Board, in their circular letter of the 6th instant, drew the attention of local authorities to the fact that their approval is required to any institution in which insured persons recommended for sanatorium benefit are treated, and stated what information they should receive in connection with applications for their approval. On the 19th instant I furnished the Insurance Commission with a list of forty-five isolation hospitals, which contain at least 838 beds, used for the treatment of tuberculosis, and which I am prepared to approve for a period of six months. I cannot say how many of those beds are at present available for the treatment of insured persons. Most of these hospitals have been provided by means of loans sanctioned by the Board, and generally speaking I have sufficient information in regard to isolation hospitals to render it unnecessary to direct any further inspection before giving approval for a limited period. At present, three hospitals containing seventy-seven beds for the treatment of tuberculosis have been approved for a period of six months.
    Mr. ASTOR: Before giving approval to an institution, does the Local Government Board take into consideration the fact whether the doctor in charge of it has a special knowledge of the particular treatment which is necessary?
    Mr. BURNS: Yes; that would be one of the conditions into which the inspector would examine.
    Mr. HUME-WILLIAMS: Is it quite clear that the isolation hospital will not be used for both the treatment of tuberculosis and fever at the same time?
    Mr. BURNS: I am glad to say that the diminution of infectious disease all over the country has placed at the disposal of nearly all the sanitary authorities a very large number of beds that can be properly used for this particular purpose.
    Mr. HUME-WILLIAMS: Not at the same time and in the same hospital?
    Mr. BURNS: No; not at the same time, but the circumstances are such they can be used for both purposes.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Has there been an inspection or report of the qualifications of the medical officers in each of these institutions to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred?
    Mr. BURNS: We are satisfied that all the medical officers who are now in charge of infectious hospitals or of hospitals for tuberculosis are thorougly qualified to undertake the duties imposed upon them.

    INSURANCE COMMITTEES (INCOME).
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANSasked the Secretary to the Treasury what is the estimated amount of the statutory income in the period to 12th January, 1913, of the insurance committee of the county of Essex, how such income is derived, and when and from whom the insurance committee will receive it?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The sources from which the statutory income of insurance committees is derived, as well as the amounts which it is estimated will be available to the insurance committees for the period ending 12th January, 1913, are set out in the Memoranda 102 and 112 I.C., copies of which I will send to the hon. Member. In addition to the money available under the provisions of the Act it is proposed to make special Grants to insurance committees towards their exceptionally heavy expenditure during the period in which the Act is being brought into operation. The amount to be granted to each committee (which will not in the case of any committee exceed £100) will be settled when the actual amount by which the statutory income is insufficient to meet
    1624
    expenditure incurred with the approval of the insurance commissioners has been ascertained. Provision is made accordingly in the Supplementary Estimate. Apart from such Grants the amount available would, on the basis taken in the above Memoranda, work out at about £790 for administration expenses and £4,500 for sanatorium benefit for Essex. As I stated in my answers to the hon. Members for Salisbury and Eastbourne on the 15th and 24th July, respectively, the precise dates of transfer of credits from the National Health Insurance Fund to the accounts of the committees will depend upon the moneys from time to time available upon the account of the fund and requirements of the respective committees.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how the immediate responsibilities of the insurance committees are to be met?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I think they are being met under the conditions laid down in the Memoranda.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Has any transfer been made to the credit of the insurance committees already?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I should like notice of that.

    FEIENDLY SOCIETY SCHEMES.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked what is the estimated number of schemes required to be prepared by friendly societies and branches under Section 72 of the National Insurance Act, and what is the estimated total cost of such schemes; and on what principle is it proposed to apportion the £47,000 Grant-in-Aid referred to in the Supplementary Estimates, Class 8, Vote 8, among such societies and branches?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The number of schemes estimated to be required for the purpose of Section 72 of the National Insurance Act is upwards of 26,000. Some societies, however, are expected to submit schemes for continuing the present benefits and contributions, in which case no valuation is necessary. The total cost of such schemes to the societies will depend on the arrangement between each society and the actuary whom it employs. Societies claiming to participate in the Grant will be allowed to submit particulars under this head at any time up to 30th November next. The Grant will not exceed one guinea for each valuation, plus

    1625
    one penny for each member included on 16th December, 1911, being then of the age of sixteen years or upwards, and contributing for benefits similar to any of those conferred by Part I. of the Act.

    FISHERMEN.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of drift fishermen from the port of Lowestoft whose sole remuneration is a share in the profits, if any, of the voyage, there is a contract of employment necessitating insurance under the National Insurance Act, and, if so, who is liable for the employer's contribution; and whether the employer has any right to recover the fishermen's contributions if at the end of the voyage no share is payable to the fishermen?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: On the information given it is not possible to answer the first part of this question which, is really one for submission to the Commissioners in their judicial capacity under Section 66 of the Act. As regards the latter part the Act provides that where there is not money payment the employer shall not be entitled to recover any portion of the contribution, but on this point I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on the 22nd instant.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to have a judicial decision given by the Insurance Commissioners in connection with these fishermen, as most of them are away on voyages and no one knows what is to be done?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: That is always being taken whenever any application is made to the Commissioners for the taking of such steps. These questions are not questions fit for question and answer.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Will the right hon. Gentleman see that this point is raised by the Insurance Commissioners. In the absence of these men, how can they possibly raise the point?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: If any one who is interested in the welfare of these men will submit the case to the Insurance Commissioners steps will immediately be taken?
    Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked whether, in the case of trawl fishermen where the master and mate are remunerated solely by share and the crew
    1626
    are paid a weekly wage, there is a contract of employment of the master and mate necessitating insurance under the National Insurance Act; and, if so, who is liable for the employer's contributions of the master and mate and of the paid crew, respectively?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The information furnished is insufficient to enable me to give any opinion on the point. The method of remuneration has no necessary bearing on the question of a contract of service. If, however, the hon. Member will communicate full particulars to me privately I will endeavour to supply him with an answer.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked in the case of longshoremen where the boat is owned by one of two or three men who work it themselves, sharing the cost of gear and the proceeds of catches made, but not otherwise paid, whether there is a contract for employment necessitating insurance under the National Insurance Act; if so, who is liable for the employer's contributions; and whether the answer is the same where the three men work alternatively a boat belonging to each of the three men?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: In both the cases described the relation between the parties would appear to be in the nature of co-partnership and not employment, but, as I have already stated, it is not possible to deal with points of this kind with certainty without fuller particulars than can well be included in a Parliamentary question.

    ASSOCIATED PORTLAND CEMENT COMBINE.
    Mr. JOHN WARDasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been drawn to a ballot now being taken, by the Associated Portland Cement Combine of their workmen asking them to transfer from any approved society they may have voluntarily joined under the National Insurance Act to an approved society about to be established by this cement trust; whether it is the intention of the Insurance Commissioners to give their approval to a society made up of persons coerced to transfer from their own properly constituted societies; and what action, if any, does he propose to take to prevent intimidation of this kind?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am informed that the firm in question have decided not to form an approved society for the purposes

    1627
    of the National Insurance Act. The remaining questions, therefore, do not arise.

    INSURANCE COMMISSION (ENGLAND).
    Mr. GODFREY LOCKER-LAMPSONasked whether the chairman of the English Insurance Commission exercises any control over the other Commissioners?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: No, Sir; the Commission follows the ordinary procedure of bodies of this kind.
    Mr. G. LOCKER-LAMPSON: Has the chairman a casting vote?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am not quite sure, but I do not think he has. Anyhow the Commissioners are in such numbers that a casting vote is not required.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Does the right hon. Gentleman assure us that all these leaflets and Regulations have been made by the Commissioners unanimously?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I cannot tell whether they were unanimously or otherwise. I do not think the Commissioners have come to an actual vote. It is the work of the Commission for which the Commission takes full responsibility.

    HOSPITALS.
    Mr. LANE-FOXasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the statement has been freely made that, under the National Insurance Act, health committees will be empowered to spend considerable sums on the building, equipment, and maintenance of hospitals, other than consumptive sanatoria, and that it is therefore very uncertain what private or voluntary subscriptions will henceforth be required; whether he realises that this statement is having the effect of checking the flow of individual subscriptions to local hospitals; and will he make some counter statement to prevent this result?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: There is no provision in the National Insurance Act empowering insurance committees to spend money on the building or equipment of hospitals. Under Section 12 it is lawful for an approved society or Insurance Committee to grant such subscriptions or donations as it may think fit to hospitals, dispensaries and other charitable institutions, and any sums so expended will be
    1628
    treated as expenditure on benefits. Approved societies and committees have also power under Section 12 in certain cases where insured persons are inmates of hospitals or similar institutions to pay sums payable on account of benefits in respect of such persons to the hospital or other institution concerned

    EXPENSES or ADMINISTRATION.
    Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANSasked whether the sum of £1,405,200 appearing in the Civil Services Estimates, Class VIII., as the proportion of benefits and expenses of administration for England, chargeable to money provided by Parliament under the National Insurance Act for the year 1912–13, is based upon the advice of the Government actuary; and why it exceeds the sum of £998,000, the amount of the actuary's estimate contained in Cd. 5983 of the charge for 1912–13, in respect of the State proportion of maximum benefits and the cost of administration?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The sum of £998,000 shown in Messrs. Hardy and Wyatt's final report is the estimated amount of the liabilities to be incurred in the period from 1st July, 1912, to 31st March, 1913, in respect of the benefits, expenses of administration, etc., under the Act. The Estimate, however, has to provide for the charges coming in course of payment within the financial year. It has therefore to include provision for the State proportion of the sanatorium benefit and medical benefit for the whole of the calendar year 1913, since the sums payable in respect of these benefits for the whole of the year are required by the Act to be paid or credited to the Insurance Committees at the beginning of the year. On the other hand, it includes no provision in respect of the State proportion of sickness, disablement and maternity benefits, and of the administrative expenses of societies in the first quarter of the calender year 1913, since the Grants in respect of this expenditure will only be made in respect of any quarter after the accounts for that quarter have been made up, and will not therefore come in course of payment until after the 31st March next.

    OUTDOOR STAFF (APPLICATIONS).
    Sir JOHN SPEARasked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will give the number of applications for employment on the outdoor staff under the National

    1629
    Insurance Act that have been received by the Commissioners in response to their advertisement, and how many of these appointments have been made or are about to be made; and will a list of the men selected be published?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: For appointment on the outside staffs (male and female) of the four Commissions 33,738 applications have been received. The number of appointments for which applications are being considered follows the Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on the outside staff, a copy of which I am forwarding to the hon. Member. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative. The usual procedure for publication will be followed.
    Mr. CLYNES: With reference to the last point, when the list is published will the right hon. Gentleman announce the past occupation of those successful gentlemen; and give some statement as to their fitness for the posts?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am not sure about that. I am willing to consider representations on the subject, but I do not think it is usual in such cases.

    RURAL POSTMEN.
    MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEasked what is the position under the National Insurance Act of a rural postman working about three hours a day, commencing at 7 a.m. on Monday, and receiving 5s. to 6s. a week from the Post Office, and who is not on the permanent postal staff?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: If the person referred to is paid under an allowance and is employed by the Department for not more than eighteen hours a week he is excepted from compulsory insurance, so far as his Post Office duties are concerned under the provisions of the National Health Insurance Order (No. 1) (Subsidiary Employments). If he is not paid under an allowance or if though paid under an allowance his duties exceed eighteen hours a week he will be insured by the Post Office, if, as appears probable, the Department is the first employer in the week. The contributions payable by such a postman will be 4d.
    MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE: If the Government are not his first employer, are they willing to share the insurance with other employers, in the same way as other employers do?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I think that is a matter for consideration.

    CROFTERS AND GILLIES.
    MARQUESS Of TULLIBARDINEasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the recent statements made by him regarding crofters and gillies, the reply given by his predecessor on 22nd November, 1911, to the hon. Member for Sutherland that a crofter can contribute less than 7d. per week under the National Insurance Act when he is his own employer and a voluntary contributor is correct; and, if so, under what regulation is this to be found?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: Yes, Sir. A voluntary contributor will be entitled to benefits, although he may not have been able to pay all the weekly contributions due. If he is a member of an approved society his benefits will depend upon the extent to which he is in arrear (in accordance with the Regulations made under Section 10 (3) of the Act), and if he is a deposit contributor on the amount standing to his credit in the Post Office Fund under the provisions of Section 42 of the Act. The Regulations referred to have been published in draft, and can be obtained at the Vote Office; and I am sending a copy to the Noble Lord.
    MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE: Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to my question as to his predecessor saying that those men would pay less than 7d. if they were voluntary contributors?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: Certainly, it would be less than 7d. per week if you average it over the year.

    GREAT WESTEHN RAILWAY PROVIDENT SOCIETY.
    Mr. JAMES THOMASasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the Great Western Railway Provident Society, membership of which prior to the Act was a condition of service, have now established an approved section under the Act; and, having regard to the fact that no man can be employed unless he joins or retains his membership in the provident society of which no amended scheme to provide for benefits for the difference between the present contributions and that required for the State section has been suggested, and seeing that no ballot of the members has been taken on the suggested alterations, what action

    1631
    he proposes to take to prevent this society becoming approved, as it defeats the intention of the National Insurance Act in so far as it debars a man from exercising a free right of choice regardless of employment?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The Great Western Railway Provident Society has not established an approved section under the National Insurance Act. No application has yet been received by the Insurance Commission for the approval of the Provident Society or of a separate section thereof. If such application is received, the Commissioners before granting approval will satisfy themselves that the constitution of the society complies with the requirements of the Act, one of which is that no society shall be approved as an employers' fund under the conditions of Section 25 of the Act if membership of it is made a condition of employment.
    Mr. J. H. THOMAS: If the society has not been approved, can the right hon. Gentleman explain why the men were on Friday last stopped 1s. 6d. out of their wages, whereas, hitherto their contributions have been 1s. 2d. per week?
    Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member must give notice of that question.

    APPOINTMENTS.
    Mr. ASTORasked (34), how many local authorities have, up to the present time, consented to allow their medical officers of health to act temporarily as medical advisers to local insurance committees in regard to applications for sanatorium benefit; and (35), how many clerks of insurance committees have been appointed up to the present time; how many of such appointments are temporary; and how many are permanent?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am sure the hon. Member will agree that it would have been unreasonable for the Commissioners to have called for returns from the committees so soon after the date on which they first commenced operations, and, therefore, the information in the possession of the Commissioners in regard to the matters referred to in the questions is not complete. The Commissioners, however, have been informed that the insurance committees have in most cases appointed sub-committees to deal with the administration, of sanatorium benefit, and that these sub-committees are in commu-
    1632
    nication with the county and county borough councils with regard to the arrangements generally, including arrangements for utilising the services of the medical officers of health. In about thirty cases in England there is definite information that the medical officer of health is already assisting the committee, and I have every reason to hope that the majority of local authorities will be willing to allow their medical officers of health to act temporarily as advisers to the committees. The Commissioners have already received notice of the appointment of clerks to 185 committees, of which twelve are permanent appointments.
    Mr. BUTCHER: Would it not be when the insurance committees are finally appointed under the Act they should make these appointments?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The conditions laid down as to what the provisional insurance committees should do are in the Memorandum. The hon. Member will see, on reference to the Memorandum, that the interests of the future are very carefully safeguarded.
    Mr. BUTCHER: Can the provisional committees appoint permanent clerks under the Memorandum or under the Act?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: Certainly under the Act. They do not appoint under the Memorandum. The Memorandum merely gives directions as to what can be done under the Act.
    Mr. BUTCHERrose—
    Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I think the hon. and learned Member should put his further question on the Paper. There are over 100 questions down for to-day.
    Mr. RUPERT GWYNNEasked how many auditors of each rank, respectively, have been appointed under the National Insurance Act, Part I., and when the appointments date from?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: Seven inspectors of audit were appointed between 8th and 10th July, and five of these have entered on their duties. Forty-nine candidates for the posts of auditor in charge of a district have been selected for appointment; of these one has been actually appointed, and the names of the others are now before the Civil Service Commissioners. The successful candidates will begin their duties as soon as their services are available. As regards the lower ranks names are under consideration by the Committee

    1633
    of Selection, who will prepare a list of candidates for examination upon the results of which appointments will be made as necessity arises. I may add that although the main work of the auditors will not commence until January next, it is important that approved societies and insurance committees should receive skilled advice from the outset in the organisation of their accounting arrangements, and that for this purpose it is desirable that the audit staff should be available as soon as possible.
    Mr. R. GWYNNE: How many appointments have been made at the present time?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: Seven inspectors of audit and one district auditor.

    APPROVED SOCIETIES.
    Lord ROBERT CECILasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that many of the smaller friendly societies who have made application for approval have received no reply, while their larger rivals in the district have been approved, with the result of giving to the larger societies a great advantage in securing new members; and what steps the Government are taking to correct this inequality?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: So far as possible applications for approval have been dealt with in the order in which they have been received. In many cases approval has been unavoidably retarded by the delay of the society in returning its rules amended in accordance with the suggestions of the Commissioners. If the Noble Lord will be good enough to furnish particulars of any societies he has in mind, their cases shall be investigated in detail.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH: Can the right hon. Gentleman state how many societies who applied for approval before 15th July have not yet received replies from the Insurance Commissioners?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I could not say without notice. There may have been some who applied on 14th July.
    Mr. GINNELLasked (36) why the Registrar of Friendly Societies has, since Parliament in the National Insurance Act gave a special meaning to the term approved society, registered new societies calling themselves by that name at a time when it was untrue, misleading, and used expressly for the purpose of obtaining
    1634
    clients under the Act; and (37) what special inquiry the Insurance Commissioners made into the record of persons applying for approval of new societies called approved societies before their approval had been obtained, and therefore when the name was false; whether the Commissioners treated that false pretence as a reason for special inquiry; whether the result of the inquiry in all these cases has been satisfactory; and whether any societies now under investigation are nevertheless operating as though approved?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: No society is entitled to call itself approved until approval is granted by the Commissioners, and the Commissioners are not aware that any society now approved offended in this respect, but if my hon. Friend will give me particulars of any case he has in mind I will make inquiries. I should be glad if my hon. Friend would give me the names of the societies he has in mind.
    Mr. GINNELL: This is the fourth time the question has appeared on the Paper. Why has the Registrar of Friendly Societies registered the London and Provincial Approved Society?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: If it is registered as an approved society it is probably because it is an approved society.
    Mr. GINNELL: How did it acquire this name before it was approved?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I have no knowledge that it did use the name or that it was registered under that name before it was approved. I am asking the hon. Member to give me particulars on the subject.
    Mr. GINNELL: Will the right hon. Gentleman say under what name it applied for registration and under what name it applied for approval?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I cannot say without notice.

    ASYLUM COMMITTEES, IRELAND (EMPLOYÉS).
    Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked what is the position of asylum committees in Ireland under the National Insurance Act where their employés already get full pay in case of sickness and claim exemption from the Act, which has been agreed to by the said committees; and whether, on application being duly made to them, certificates of exemption will be granted by the Irish Insurance Commissioners?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: Employment under an asylum committee in Ireland can be excepted under paragraph (b) of Part II. of the First Schedule of the National Insurance Act, if the Insurance Commissioners certify that the provision made for sickness and disablement is, on the whole, not less favourable than the corresponding benefits provided by Part I. of the Act. If the full pay given in case of sickness only lasts for a limited, period, it would not be sufficient as provision must also be made for disablement.
    Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Is not full pay in case of sickness equal to, if not greater, than the benefits under the Act?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The benefits given have to be equivalent to the benefits under the Act.

    EMPLOYÉS' FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
    Mr. POINTERasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to a printed form issued by Messrs. Novello, music printers, London, to their employés, in which the latter are required to state to what approved society they belong; and whether, in view of the provisions of the National Insurance Act, he will say what action he proposes to take in the matter?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: If the hon. Member will furnish me with a copy of the form in question I will see whether it affords ground for inquiry by the Commissioners.
    Mr. CHARLES DUNCANasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been drawn to a notice issued by Messrs. Hamley Brothers, Regent Street, to the effect that the directors wish it to be understood that they cannot approve of any employé belonging to the National Amalgamated Union of Shop Assistants, Warehousemen, and Clerks, and could not retain any member of this society in their employment, but as far as they are aware they have no objections to any other approved society; and will he state what action he proposes to take to secure freedom of choice for these workpeople?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I have had no previous information as to this case. It is directly contrary to the spirit of the Act that freedom in the choice of an approved society should be. interfered with by pressure from employers. I am glad to say that very few allegations of the kind
    1636
    referred to have been brought to my notice, and the overwhelming majority of employers are observing the spirit as well as the letter of the Act.

    UNEMPLOYMENT (POSTAL OFFICIALS).
    MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEasked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state how many applications there were from the postal officials in Scotland for posts under Part II. of the National Insurance Act in response to the circular by the Postmaster-General to postal officials to apply, and how many applications were successful, specifying males and females?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: Applications from officials of the Post Office in Scotland were not sent in separately from other applications. A considerable proportion of vacancies, under Part II. of the National Insurance Act in Scotland were for women to act as claims clerks and checking clerks for the divisional office. All these posts, to the number of forty-eight, were filled by women from the Postal Service. The number of vacancies for men in Scotland for which clerical experience was the main qualification was very limited. Three of these have already been filled by officers from the Post Office.

    SAILORS' AND FIREMEN'S UNION.
    Mr. STEWARTasked the President of the Board of Trade whether a local seafarers' union, having its offices at Southampton, which is said to represent some three or four thousand sailors and firemen, has been granted direct representation on the management committee of the Seamen's National Insurance Society; whether an application for similar representation on the Derelicts Committee by the Imperial Merchant Service Guild, representing some 15,000 captains and officers of the merchant service, was refused; and, if so, will he explain why discrimination in this way is shown by the Board of Trade?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I do not see what the two cases have in common. In the former one out of three seats available for representatives of sailors and firemen was allotted to the particular union named in the question. In the latter case only one seat was available for a representative of shipmasters, and the method of selection which was adopted was fully explained in the reply which my right hon.

    1637
    Friend gave to the question of the hon. Member for the Devizes Division of Wiltshire on 17th July, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy.

DISTURBANCES IN BELFAST.
Mr. DEVLIN: I wish to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland a question, of which I have given him private notice, Whether he has any information with regard to the grave situation now existing in Belfast; whether it is the case that 2,500 workers, including some 500 Protestants, Liberal in politics, have been driven off the Queen's Island; whether many of those workers have been injured, some of them seriously; whether any arrests have been made in connection with those outrages upon inoffensive workmen; whether it is true that practically no protection has been afforded to these workers by the police authorities; whether he is aware that the most profound indignation exists amongst all sections of the people of Belfast at the neglect by the authorities to provide protection for the workers, and what steps the Government propose to take in regard to these appalling matters?
The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): There is no doubt that owing to a number of cowardly and dangerous assaults on workmen employed in the City of Belfast shipyards, a great majority of the Roman Catholics there employed, and a number of Protestants also, are being compelled by this intimidation to stay away from their work, thereby reducing themselves and their families to want, and endangering the whole shipbuilding industry in Belfast. I am also aware that great dissatisfaction exists with the measures hitherto taken for the maintenance of order in the city and for the protection of the workers. I assure the House that it is the intention of the Government to take every possible step to maintain order and afford the fullest possible protection to workmen anxious to fulfil their contracts. With regard to the particular information which the hon. Member asks for, although I am in possession of a great deal of it, I shall be in a better position to give him a fuller account of it to-morrow if he will renew his question. I am glad to say that two persons, at all events, will be brought to trial for the most serious assault yet made upon Mr. McIlroy, and that various other persons will be made amenable to the very
1638
long list of assaults that have unhappily taken place. I believe this matter is one of great importance, and I shall be in a better position to give full information if the hon. Member will repeat his question to-morrow.
Mr. O'GRADY: May I ask whether the Chief Secretary is aware of the fact that quite a number of these men driven from their work are not Irishmen, but they are Scotchmen, Welshmen, and Englishmen who go over to the yards when the work is on, and they are included in the chasing out of the yards as well. If that be so, what is going to be done to protect the workmen there, specially when the pressure of the work occurs again when these men who come from England, Scotland, and Wales, and who have been driven out, will go back again?
Mr. BIRRELL: I believe it is undoubtedly the fact that a number of workmen in Belfast, finding the conditions of work so intolerable, have shaken the dust from their feet and left the city. I quite recognise that that is one of the features of the case, and that is a matter which I should like time to deal with. It is a difficult thing to secure absolute protection to workmen in these large shipbuilding yards which are private property, when at any moment they may be in a quiet corner made the subject of a cruel assault, it is not very easy to secure them complete protection. Even in the Queen's Road when 20,000 men turn out, it is a seething mass of humanity, and it is even there very difficult to prevent a cruel assault being committed in some portion of the crowd that neither the police nor the military can reach. I assure the House that this matter is engaging the full attention of the Government, and every possible step will be taken to secure the workmen the full protection.
Mr. BARNES: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large number over there who have not shaken the dust from their feet, but are there now, are in receipt of unemployed benefit out of the various British trade union funds, who are thus involved in very considerable expense? Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that the grave dissatisfaction alluded to by my right hon. Friend is also shared by the British trade unions involved in this expense, and will he take some further and more drastic action to have protection given to those men?
Mr. BIRRELL: I am quite aware of everything the hon. Member has pointed out.
Mr. CLYNES: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he expects order will be restored so long as gentlemen of influence inside and outside of this House—
Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: This opportunity after regular questions have been completed is confined entirely to urgent matters, and supplementary questions come under the same rule.
Mr. DEVLIN: May I ask the Chief Secretary whether he will be in a position to-morrow to definitely state what are the precise arrangements he will make to protect these people, and whether, in view of the absolute inactivity of the police authorities and those in charge, he will make a definite statement to-morrow?
Mr. BIRRELL: I cannot allow that statement about the absolute inactivity of the police authorities to pass unnoticed, but I may say that I do intend to-morrow to give a full and complete account of what has happened, what is happening, and what the intentions of the Government are.
Mr. DILLON: I wish to put a question to the Chief Secretary for Ireland, of which I have given him private notice: Whether his attention has been called to the statement of Messrs. Harland and Wolff announcing the closing of their shipbuilding yards owing to attacks made upon their workmen by organised bands of roughs from the yard of Messrs. Workman and Clark; whether he is aware that by the closing of Messrs. Harland and Wolff's yard 12,000 men will be thrown out of employment, and what steps the Government are taking to protect the workmen of Messrs. Harland and Wolff against intimidation and attack? If the right hon. Gentleman prefers not to answer my question now I will repeat it to-morrow.
Mr. BIRRELL: I have seen the printed statement in the newspapers to-day as to the announcement made by Messrs. Harland and Wolff on Sunday night, and I will deal with the matter to-morrow.

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES PROCEDURE).
Sir F. BANBURY: I wish to ask your ruling, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, with regard to our proceedings upon the Supplementary Votes for the Coal Mines (Minimum Wage) Act. Sir Erskine May, in his Parliamentary practice, says in regard to Supplementary Grants:—
"A Supplementary Estimate may be presented either for a further Grant to a service already sanctioned by Parliament in addition to the sum already demanded for the current financial year, or for a Grant caused by a fresh occasion for expenditure that has arisen since the presentation of the sessional Estimates, such as expenditure newly imposed upon the Executive Government by Statute."
None of those conditions quoted by Sir Erskine May are fulfilled. There has been no Statute imposing additional expenditure upon the Executive Government, because the Coal Mines (Minimum Wage) Act made no mention in any of its Clauses of any expenditure of any sort or kind. I find that on page 559 Sir Erskine May further states:—
"In pursuance of the Standing Orders which regulate the financial procedure of the House, Committees of the Whole House are appointed to sanction by their resolutions grants of public money or the imposition of a charge upon the people. The Committee is appointed, either before the commencement or after the close of Public Business, by a Motion that 'this House Mill,' on a future day, 'resolve itself into a Committee' to consider the matter specified in the Motion, and at this stage no statement can be made."
I venture to say that in this case that has not been done. I have referred to the various Acts which have been passed in the last year and the year before which do impose a charge upon the people. They are the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1911, the Lunacy Act, 1911, the Small Landholders Act, 1911, the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1911, the National Insurance Act, the Resident Magistrates (Belfast) Act, the Census (Ireland) Act, 1910, the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1910, and the Census (Great Britain) Act, 1910. They all provide for expenditure and every single one of them has a Clause which was based on a Resolution moved in Committee of this House. I therefore ask you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, whether under the circumstances which I have just mentioned, it will not be necessary to have a Committee to authorise the expenditure of this public money before a Supplementary Vote is taken?
Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member was good enough to give notice of this question to Mr. Speaker, and, therefore, I have had an opportunity of

1641
considering it with some care. With regard to the first point about the question of the suggestion that the Bill ought to have had a Money Committee and a Clause in the Bill providing for the appointment of arbitrators, that, as Mr. Speaker said a few days ago, if it is a sound point, is one which will no doubt be taken notice of by the Comptroller and Auditor-General and is not a question for the Chair. With regard to the second point about the question of a Vote in Committee of Supply requiring a Money Committee, I do not think there is anything in that point. The Government is entitled, of course, to submit to the House a Supplementary Estimate for such purpose as they think fit, and it is for the Committee and the House on Report to say whether they will or will not accept that Supplementary Estimate.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.
  NEW MEMBEE SWORN.
  Ernest Craig, Esquire, for the County of Chester (Crewe Division).
  BISHOPRICS BILL [Lords].
  Read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Ordered, That, on this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No.
  15, Business other than Business of Supply may be taken before Eleven of the clock.—[The Prime minister.]
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Proceedings in Committee on Navy and Army Expenditure, 1910–11, and in Committee of Ways and Means, be not interrupted this evening under the Standing Order (Sittings of the House), and may be entered upon and proceeded with at any hour, although opposed."—[The Prime Minister.]
  Question put.
  The House divided: Ayes, 253; Noes, 94.

  Division No. 166.]

  AYES.

  [4.2 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  De Forest, Baron

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Delany, William

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Agnew, Sir George

  Devlin, Joseph

  Hughes, S. L.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Alden, Percy

  Dillon, John

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Allen, Arthur Acland (Dumbartonshire)

  Donelan, Captain J.

  Jones, Rt. Hon. Sir D.Brynmor (Sw'nsea)

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Doris, William

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Arnold, Sydney

  Duffy, William J.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney)

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Joyce, Michael

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Keating, M.

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Kelly, Edward

  Barnes, George N.

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Barton, William

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Kilbride, Denis

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Falconer, James

  King, Joseph

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S.Molton)

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George)

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Ffrench, Peter

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Fltzgibbon, John

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Leach, Charles

  Boland, John Plus

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Furness, Stephen

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Lundon, T.

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Ginnell, Laurence

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Lynch, A. A.

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Glanville, H. J.

  Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk, Burghs)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  McGhee, Richard

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Greig, Col. James William

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Macpherson, James

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Cameron, Robert

  Hackett, John

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Hancock, J, G.

  Manfield, Harry

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Martin, Joseph

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Clough, William

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

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Clynes, J. R.

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

  Middlebrook, William

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Harwood, George

  Millar, James Duncan

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Molloy, Michael

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Mond, Sir Alfred M.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hayward, Evan

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Cotton, William Francis

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Mooney, John J.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Morgan, George Hay

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

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

  Morrell, Philip

  Crumley, Patrick

  Henry, Sir Charles

  Morison, Hector

  Cullinan, John

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

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Muldoon, John

  Davies, E. William (Eifion)

  Hinds, John

  Munro, Robert

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt Hon. R. C.

  Dawes, James A.

  Hogge, James Myles

  Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Neilson, Francis

  Radford, George Heynes

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Reddy, Michael

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Nuttall, Harry

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Verney, Sir Harry

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  O'Dowd, John

  Roch, Walter F.

  Warner, Sir T. C. T.

  Ogden, Fred

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Webb, H.

  O'Grady, James

  Rowlands, James

  Wedgwood. Josiah C.

  O'Malley, William

  Rowntree, Arnold

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh)

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

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

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  White,' Patrick (Meath, North)

  O'Shee, James John

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

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

  Wiles, Thomas

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Sheehy, David

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Smith, H. B. L. (Northampton)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Snowden, Philip

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Summers, James Woolley

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

  Sutherland, J. E.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

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

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Illingworth and Mr. Gulland.

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Taylor, T. C. (Radcliffe)

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fell, Arthur

  Newdegate, F, A.

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Newman, John R. P.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Astor, Waldorf

  Fleming, Valentine

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

  Baird, J. L.

  Foster, Philip Staveley

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Barnston, Harry

  Grant, J. A.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Barrie, H. T.

  Gretton, John

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Guinness, Hon. W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Hardie, J. Keir

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Stanier, Beville

  Bigland, Alfred

  Henderson, Major H. (Berks)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Bird, Alfred

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Stewart, Gershom

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Hills, John Waller

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Burn, Col. C. R.

  Horner, A. L.

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

  Butcher, J. G.

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Campion, W. R.

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

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

  Cassel, Felix

  Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle)

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

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End)

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (S. Geo., Han.S.)

  Younger, Sir George

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Macmaster, Donald

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. Scott

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  F. Banbury and Sir J, Lonsdale.

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Malcolm, Ian

  Question put, and agreed to.

SUPPLY.— [21ST ALLOTTED DAY.]

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES AND SUTTLKMEXTAKY ESTI- MATES, 1912–13.— [Progress.]
  Considered in Committee.
  [Mr. MACLEAN in the Chair.]

  Class 5.—COLONIAL SERVICES.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  1. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,073,754 (including a Supplementary sum of £503,000), be granted to His Majesty, to
  1672
  complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for sundry Colonial Services, including certain Grants-in-Aid." [Note.—£290,000 has been voted on account.]
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: I wish to raise a point of Order and to call attention to the way in which these Estimates are presented. There are a number of New Services which have never been heard of before.

  1673
  You will find them on pages 11 down to 24, and on page 10 there is on Class V. a Supplemental Estimate, so-called, increasing the Vote for British East Africa from £23,500 to £398,500, and the Vote for Uganda from £45,000 to £170,000. It is the first time in the history of Parliament there has been any such attempt to call such a thing a Supplemental Estimate. In addition, it is stated, this enormous sum now put down as a Supplemental Estimate will not be accounted for in detail to the Comptroller and Auditor-General, but that he will be furnished by the Colonial Office with the audited accounts and with any reports of the Director of Colonial Audit thereon. Later on it is stated the Treasury are to be allowed to prescribe without Statute a certain rate of interest. My question is this: Whether these Votes, proposing absolutely new matter, come within the scope of the Standing Order, which at ten o'clock will automatically prevent all discussion? My submission is these are Votes so large, so unparalleled in character, and so absolutely new, that they are not really in the nature of Votes, but are legislation. These Votes are a statement that there is to be taken out of the hands of the Comptroller and Auditor General a sum of money, £500,000 in extent, and in addition to that, as far as I understand it, the Treasury are to prescribe certain rates of interest. I therefore wish to ask you whether there is any precedent for calling these matters Supplementary Votes, and consequently whether there is any authority for saying these will come under the Standing Order at ten o'clock, thus preventing all discussion of what is absolutely unparalleled matter?
  Sir F. BANBURY: Before you rule, Sir, may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that, sharing with him the views he has just expressed, we on Friday endeavoured to prevent the Government doing what is illegal?
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: If the hon. and learned Member will look at his Votes and at page 500, he will find this is not a New Service but an Old Service, and I think therefore it is quite in order to proceed.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: May I submit to you that at all events on page 11 they are endorsed as New Services, and to simply put in "original estimate, £23,000; revised estimate, £398,000," and call that a Supplementary Estimate, is a farce.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: We have not got to page 11 yet; when we have, we will deal with it.
  Sir CLEMENT HILL: I do not rise to criticise the Secretary of State for the Colonies for bringing forward this Grant for Uganda, but I should like to ask a few questions upon this Supplementary Estimate which, for my part, I would most willingly see largely increased. The position of the Secretary of State on this matter is quite different from that of his predecessors when we had debates on the Uganda Railway from 1895 to 1900. In those days statesmen on the Liberal Benches were strongly opposed to the construction of a railway, and men like Sir Charles Dilke and Mr. Labouchere were strong in their condemnation of the scheme, declaring that the line could never meet with any success. Even politicians of the present day, like the President of the Board of Trade, expressed a strong opinion that there was no likelihood of the line being made. Incidentally, I should like to point out how extremely difficult it is to talk upon this subject without a map. If it were possible to have a map displayed in the House Members would better understand the-question. Mr. Bryce, our Ambassador at Washington, speaking on this subject, asked if the line went over the main escarpment, and had it begun on the other side to descend to the shores of Lake Tanganyika. The Secretary of State for the Colonies will know there is a slight distance of about 1,000 miles between Victoria Nyanza, which the line purported to have reached, and Lake Tanganyika. A certain amount of criticism from the Liberal Benches has been founded upon an imperfect knowledge of the country. The country was described as a desert. The railway was said to run through territories occupied by savage tribes; it was a line which could not possibly pay. The climate was one in which no European could live, and trade was nonexistent and could not possibly be expected to arise. But the facts are the exact contrary. White children are born and reared there and prove perfectly healthy. Trade has sprung up very largely with natives in the interior; sheep and cattle are developing in large numbers; cotton is growing, and I hope will be largely developed, and the peace of the country has been assured, so that it is perfectly safe for a white man to walk through it armed only with an umbrella,

  1675
  which is scarcely needed for the sun. In every way we may hope that the country is developing, and will justify the construction of the railway through it. I wish to express my sense of the great loss sustained by the death of Mr. Currie, the general manager in East Africa, to whom so much of the success of the line is due.
  I should like to quote a few figures to substantiate what I have said. The railway was begun in 1895 and was finished in 1904. It cost, I believe, excluding the suspense account, £5,500,000. The lake steamers, wharves and docks at Victoria Nyanza cost £188,000; and, in passing, I should like to ask whether these steamers have been insured? The steamers show a working profit of 11 per cent.: if it were not for the cost of the wharves and docks, the working of the steamers would show a profit of 14 per cent. In 1904–5, which was about the time when the administration was handed over to the Colonial Office, the receipts of the railway amounted to £137,000. In 1910–11 they had grown to £254,000, or nearly double. The net profit in 1909–10, was £65,867; and in 1910–11, £98,519; an increase of nearly one-third over the previous year. The import of agricultural implements—another sign of development—amounted in 1906–7 to £19,000, and in 1910–11 to £29,000. The exports show how the country is developing. In British East Africa alone they were in 1909–10, £190,668; and in 1910–11, £276,480; or nearly 45 per cent, extra, of which grain showed an increase of £30,000, hides of £17,000, and wool of £6,000. All these are up-country products, and the railway will encourage the development of these industries. Therefore it is well worth while for the Government and for this House to vote larger supplies for the development of the railway than have hitherto been granted. I want to see more done in Uganda, and I should like to see some such statement for the construction of a main road over the cataracts from Nimile to Gondokoro. I should like to see more done in Uganda. The Government have already made an extension that runs from the outlet of the Nile from Victoria Nyanza, and I want to see the Nile and Victoria Nyanza connected and some steps taken to improve the road over the cataracts. There might be a railway or a motor road to ensure through communication from Mombasa to Khartoum. I hope the Secretary of State
  1676
  will be able to give the Committee information regarding what is proposed for the improvement of the Uganda communications.
  In East Africa itself they have already made a line from Nairobi to Thika. It is called a tram line, but I do not know what the nature of it is, although I believe it is of the same metre gauge as the Uganda Railway. I think that line ought to be extended to Fort Hall and Keina, which I believe would open up a very rich and improving district. Certain improvements are necessary on the line to enable it to carry the soda which it is hoped will be dug out from the great soda lake there. I am not certain whether any of these works are included in this estimate of £380,000, or whether the £380,000 is something quite extra and in addition to it. The progress of the up-country is, as I have shown, very great, as is proved by the agricultural developments which have taken place and the goods imported. But this country can only be thoroughly developed by a further railway, and, without going into the engineering question, I should like to see a railway built to a district now largely occupied by a very energetic colony of Boers from South Africa on the Nasin Gishu plateau. This district cannot really become of use unless opened up by a railway, or, at any rate, by a road of sufficient strength to carry motor traffic. That might be done at less cost, and it would be a great boon to the settlers of that particular district. I do not think, after the way in which we have been booming East Africa, and inviting settlers to go there, the Government would be justified in not doing all it possibly could to give them every facility and every assistance in developments of that kind. I hope the Government will not follow what I am afraid is a Treasury principle of allowing somebody else to make communications which might be made by the Government itself. In these great countries the first thing is to let the public know that money is to be made. The more and more settlers are induced to go into the country, the more and more must be done for its development. It is very difficult for any Government to get money to spend on these new countries which it is so necessary should be spent, and it is growing increasingly difficult to get sufficient money for the purpose. I do not think, if we look at our great Dominions, they would have developed if it had been left to the Government of this country. Take Canada, the

  1677
  great extension of railways there is the result of private enterprise. Or take the Argentina, the railways there have been constructed by private enterprise. Even in India, a country where one would think we were free to do as we like, where there is little control by anybody except by the officials themselves, there they cannot build railways and put on rolling stock with the speed demanded by the needs of commerce. I believe I am right in saying that this year only thirty miles of new railway construction has taken place in India. That leads me up to what I want to say. I think it is worth considering whether the Government should retain in their hands large schemes for developing this country. I should like to suggest that they should consider the possibility of selling the Uganda Railway to some company. I was talking some time ago to a man who was engaged in a good deal of railway enterprise. He ran up the figures roughly and asked if the railway was beginning to pay. I said about ½ per cent. He said that with £5,000,000 for outlay, and £1,000,000 for capital, he could do it at that figure. I think it is possible that private enterprise might be inclined to take over that railway. If it did, I am certain that it could at once—without the difficulties which the Government must encounter in coming to this House—proceed to develop the country and make feeders and run lines into these subsidiary districts. Then, without constant criticism of the Government, East Africa and Uganda would have a chance of going ahead, and money would be spent on development. I firmly believe that if that were done we should sec developments which would make these countries, which were so much criticised when they were first occupied, most valuable and an ever-increasing adjunct of our great Dominions.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: I beg to move: "That the Chairman do report Progress and ask leave to sit again."
  I do so for the purpose of obtaining a statement from the Treasury as to the financial and legal position of the Vote.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That Motion cannot be accepted by the Chair. This is one of the allotted days for winding up Supply, and therefore I cannot accept the Motion
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: I think it is one of the most serious departures from the rules of the House of Commons that I
  1678
  have known in my time. To begin with, I submit that the Vote is on its face an absurdity; that it is absolutely unprecedented; and that it cannot ever obtain legal frame. Would anybody suppose it possible that a Vote of £23,000, headed "Original Estimate," could develop into a Vote of £398,000 as a Revised Estimate? Could anybody suppose that a Vote of £45,000, "Original Estimate," could become a Vote of £170,000 as a Revised Estimate? Must not the subject of a Supplemental Estimate be something existing, in rerum natura? If I determine to make a railway in Uganda at the price of £100,000, I may perhaps find my amount is short and may have to put on £150,000 or £200,000. That would be a Supplementary Estimate, but surely this is not a Supplementary Estimate. It is impossible to say that, because you bring down an Estimate of £500,000 in respect of absolutely new works, which come under the head of a Colonial Service, and dovetail it on to some little Service of £20,000 or £30,000, that your £500,000 is money of a Supplementary Service. Take the note to this Estimate. It says:
  "The Grant to Uganda is required to provide for the construction—"
  That is not an addition, but new construction, which shows that it is an absolutely new work.
  "the construction at an estimated cost of £25,000 of a proposed railway—"
  If it is a proposed railway, how can it be a Supplementary Estimate?
  "from Kampala to Port Bell, in the Uganda Protectorate, and also for the improvement, at an estimated cost of £100,000, of communications in the Eastern Province of Uganda."
  Because in last year's report the Comptroller and Auditor-General was not favourable to this kind of work, the extraordinary course is taken of saying, for the first time in our history, as regards this £500,000, that it is not to be expended under the supervision of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. Why is it we have not a full estimate? We have only two items: British East Africa and Uganda. That is all the information that this House is going to get of expenditure of £500,000, which was never mentioned in the Budget, never heard of before, and as to which we have no details of any kind or description, I therefore submit to you, Mr. Maclean, that evidence that it is an absolute innovation in our procedure. Last year the Vote was announced in the Budget and was included in the Finance Act. We first had the statement

  1679
  in Committee of Ways and Means, next the Resolution, then the Estimate, and then the Statute. Now we are to have the whole thing done by means of what is gaily called a Supplementary Estimate. Look at the position in which we are putting the Treasury as the paying - out office, and the Auditor-General. What is to be said for giving the Treasury powers by means of a Supplementary Estimate which hitherto have only been given by Statute? Let me illustrate what I mean. Take the case of Irish Land Stock. Would it not be an extraordinary thing if you could provide for the rate of interest payable by the Irish farmers without a Statute? That is what you are doing here to the extent of £500,000, because you say this:—
  "These sums will be advanced—"
  that is, the £500,000 which you are getting by taxing our tobacco and our whisky—
  "These sums will be advanced by way of loan to the Governments of the British East Africa Protectorate and Uganda, and will be repaid, with interest at the rate of 3½ per cent, per annum, on terms prescribed by the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury."
  Where do they get these powers? Last year you took them by Statute. Where do you get them now? This Estimate must form, later on, a portion of the Appropriation Act. Is there any precedent for putting in the Appropriation Act anything except the Appropriated Votes which have already been voted in Committee of Supply? We have heard of "Lloyd George finance," but I never thought it would come to this, that a revised Estimate of £500,000 should be supplemental to an amount of less than £70,000. I want to know if this is to form portion of the guillotine closure at ten o'clock to-night? This is a mixed form of legislation. It is half finance and half legislation. Is the guillotine to fall upon this absolutely new proposition, which was never heard of before, which was never debated in Committee of Ways and Means, which was not dealt with by Bill, as last year, and is the whole thing to be passed by the House of Commons in this absolutely new way? It is a terrible thing to impose taxes at any time, but when you do so you have the consciousness that the money will be spent in some manner in which you can debate the expenditure of the Government. This is subtracting from the power of the House of Commons to debate how taxes can be spent. The Prime Minister made an extraordinary statement with regard to communications passing which led to this Vote.
  1680
  I arraign the system whereby one Minister can, by speaking to another, extract from the Chancellor of the Exchequer £500,000. Three weeks ago I asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether we should be put in possession of the correspondence between the Treasury and the Colonial Office in regard to this Vote. I was told "No." Therefore the gradual downward progress has been this. Last year £250,000 was dealt with by Statute, now you are giving £500,000 for the same service, and next year, I suppose, it will be £1,500,000. Why could not the House of Commons see upon what basis the Colonial Secretary goes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer? If last year £250,000 was enough, why is it this year to be £500,000? What security have we that next year it will not be enormously increased? As the Comptroller and Auditor-General is to be withdrawn from control by this system of new-fangled legislation and mongrel legislation—it cannot be called by any respectable term—and as the control of the House is withdrawn, I ask at what moment of time did the Colonial Secretary tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer that this money would be required? How did he explain that last year he only asked for £250,000; what are his promises with regard to the future; are we to proceed upon some whimsy which the Colonial Office takes into its head that last year they wanted £250,000, this year £500,000, and next year £1,500,000?
  This House has one officer to overlook expenditure, the Comptroller and Auditor-General. Why are we to have no satisfaction from our own officer? How is it that last year you did not come to the conclusion that £500,000 was wanted? Is the Colonial Office going to take it into its hands and its head to expend all these huge sums in tropical countries without getting any estimates in advance? Are these contracts to be put up to tender? We know that originally £5,000,000 was the expenditure proposed for the Uganda Railway, and we know that it expanded to £12,000,000. How do we know that the same thing is not going to occur in regard to this matter? There have been no papers laid before the House upon it, so far as I know. It is all very well for hon. Gentlemen above the Gangway representing a rich country to talk about railways here and railways there. These taxes are paid out of the hard earnings of poor men. It is a poor country which is enmeshed in this rich country which is having to pay these taxes.

  1681
  You put £1,750,000 extra taxation upon us last year. Where is this going to end? I protest against this form of bastard legislation. Show me any precedent in the history of this country for an estimate like this. None can be found. You are convicted of your sins by what you did last year. If last year a Statute was required for £250,000, how much more is a Statute required today? You do not admit it, but you are sinning against the light, because twice already this year this point has been raised. We did not know until this Estimate was laid on the Table ten days ago that the Comptroller and Auditor-General was going to be dispensed with. Out of whose brain did this mad notion spring? Surely if we require the Auditor-General to control our amounts here where the services are performed under our eyes, in this distant country of Africa, in which your are now going to pour millions, you should give the Auditor-General some element of control. The whole thing seems to me so extraordinary that unless some precedent can be quoted for it, it is certainly a novel thing that you should put down these things in Supply in the extra allotted days, so that the House of Commons is not afforded the poor protection of a Motion to report Progress. That is the procedure. What is the necessity for it? Of coarse Irish Estimates are gone. There are to be no Irish Estimates discussed at all for the remainder of the Session. Our money is here, and the ordinary control that should be exercised has absolutely evaporated and disappeared. I protest against the system. It is riotous, it is wasteful, and it is illegal.
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Masterman): I do not want to interfere in any purely Colonial question that has been raised, and some of the questions which the hon. and learned Gentleman asks will, of course, be more fully dealt with by the Secretary for the Colonies—questions such as the basis of the Estimates, and the dreams we have with regard to the future. But the action of the Treasury has been directly challenged in very strong language, and various statements have been made by him which are entirely incorrect in connection with the action of the Treasury in the matter. He said that this action that has been taken is without precedent. I have a very large number of precedents. It is a perfectly normal course of action, which has been followed by all Governments
  1682
  which have been responsible for this kind of matter in recent years. The hon. and learned Gentleman said that for the first time we have put down a Motion exempting the Grant-in-Aid from the audit of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. No Grant-in-Aid ever comes under the Comptroller and Auditor-General.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: I deny that this is a Grant-in-Aid. That is a pure farce.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Exactly the same course has been adopted in connection with loans, especially those which are similar to this—loans for Colonial purposes.
  Sir G. PARKER: Will the hon. Gentleman give us a precedent?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Let mo take one or two of the most recent to begin with. In July, 1910, on a Supplementary Estimate for Colonial services, the House voted £120,000 for the Uganda Railway extension. That was voted in the manner which is agreeable to the hon. and learned Gentleman. In the Estimates of 1911–12, £60,000 was voted as a loan, and on the face of the Estimates there was the very statement which he now announces is unprecedented.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: You had a Statute for it.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: No, it was voted on an Estimate.
  "The Grant will be voted for the Government of Uganda, and will be treated as a loan repayable by that Government, as and when the financial situation of the Protectorate may admit of such terms as may be prescribed by the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury."
  That is the statement which the hon. and learned Gentleman says has never before appeared in the whole of British history. Let me take another example. In February, 1911, £140,000 was voted as an estimate for a railway in Northern Nigeria as a loan.
  "The Grant will be advanced to the Government of Northern Nigeria, and will be treated as a loan repayable by that Government on the terms prescribed by the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury."
  The terms fixed in the case of that loan were 3½ per cent, interest and 1½ per cent, sinking fund. That is what the hon. and learned Gentleman calls making fresh legislation.
  Mr. A. LYTTELTON: Were these Supplementary Estimates?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: They were normal Estimates. The first, I think, was a

  1683
  supplementary. I have other cases of supplementaries. In 1898 and 1899 there were Grants-in-Aid of the Gold Coast Northern Territories by Supplementary Estimates, and special provision was made for an advance for telegraphic construction, and the Estimate says:—
  "So much of this expenditure as may be found to be due to the cost of telegraphic construction, which is believed to be from £25,000 to £30,000, is to be treated as a loan repayable by the Colony."
  It was treated as a loan repayable by the Colony, and the exact amount proved to be £29,400. In July, 1900, and in February, 1901, Supplementary Votes for Colonial services of £200,000 each, or £400,000 in all, were made to meet the expenditure consequent on the disturbances in Ashanti. The Estimates said—
  "It is intended that the advance should he repaid by the Gold Coast in such instalments as, looking to the financial condition of the Colony, the Secretary of State may require."
  That is an exact precedent for the conditions under which this money is being voted. There are other precedents in connection with loans and Grants-in-Aid to the Colonial services. In 1901–2 a loan of £75,000 was made by Supplementary Estimate to the Viceroy of Gujarat. It was a separate Vote for a loan without an Act voted by this House, and subsequently treated as this loan will be, passed, I suppose, by the Committee as a Supplementary Estimate, approved by the Board, and given statutory sanction.
  Mr. BONAR LAW: Does not the Treasury Chest Act by Statute give those powers, whereas here there is no Statute?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The money is not advanced from the Treasury Chest. All that happens is that the money payments into and out of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank are drawn from the Treasury Chest. The Treasury Chest has nothing to do with the loan or the system which creates the loan. It is a matter of a book-keeping transaction.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: What is this supplemental to?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: It is supplementary to the Grant-in-Aid in the original Estimates: in one case for British East Africa, and in the other for Uganda. We should be perfectly illegal and wrong if we put it down as a new service. It is a Grant-in-Aid supplementary to the Grants-in-Aid which have been or which will be voted in the original Estimates. There is ample
  1684
  precedent for it, and there is no new attempt to take anything out of the control of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. There was no possibility of presenting the Estimate in any other way than as a Supplementary Estimate to the Grants-in-Aid which are in the original Estimate.
  Sir G. PARKER: Was the original Estimate of £15,500 for railways, as the loan is for railways?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I cannot say offhand, but it would not make the slightest difference. The Estimate is a Grant-in-Aid for the benefit of British East Africa, and this is a Supplementary Grant-in-Aid for the benefit of British East Africa, and I do not think there has ever been a splitting up under heads or sub-heads of all the various forms in which money in British East Africa is spent. I understand from the Treasury that that has never been done and the money is voted as a Grant-in-Aid to any particular British Colony.
  Mr. A. LYTTELTON: I am not going for a moment into the precedents which the right hon. Gentleman has very rapidly read, but the merits of the case are entirely in favour of the Motion of my hon. and learned Friend. Consider the full extent of the position taken up by the Treasury on this occasion. If the hon. Gentleman is correct it would be competent for the Treasury to put down an original Estimate of £10 for certain purposes and increase it by £1,000,000 in a Supplementary Estimate, although there should be withdrawn from that expenditure the criticism of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, to which this House is of course accustomed. That surely is a very extraordinary position. The right hon. Gentleman read out several precedents, so far as I was able to follow him, of very small sums, and it may be that on those occasions they passed notice. But supposing, as I suggest, the original Estimate was even more disproportionate than the present, would it be really competent to add to it to such an enormous extent by a Supplementary Estimate by merely calling it a Grant-in-Aid when it is in fact a loan, and prescribe the rate of interest without any effective power in this House at all. The other day the Colonial Secretary twitted me in regard to certain observations I made with regard to the cost of construction of railways. He showed that a railway was constructed, I think, in Nigeria, at a cost of £2,000 per

  1685
  mile. Of course, it may be a very proper and politic thing to do, to put down a railway in a very light form, but a railway laid down at such a cost as that will probably have to be renewed in three or four years. Therefore, such an estimate as that ought surely to be before the House. The Chairman has refused to accept, a Motion to report Progress under Standing Order 15, but that Standing Order evidently contemplates that there should be full material before the House, and an opportunity of criticism afterwards by the Auditor and Comptroller-General of any expenditure which is sought to be made, and for which the authority of the House is taken. The whole power of criticism goes from the House if there is an extra expenditure on something entirely new, say, £1,000,000 or £2,000,000—
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The right hon. Gentleman is making the point that this Supplementary Estimate is removed from the control of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, but the words used are exactly the same as in the ordinary case. There is nothing new.
  Mr. A. LYTTELTON: If that observation is sound, why did the Colonial Office and the Treasury proceed by way of Bill last year for an expenditure of £250,000, and this year add a much larger sum by the farce of declaring it to be supplementary to something which never existed. That question was put by the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. T. M. Healy) and no answer was given.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I thought that was very fully explained by the Secretary of State for the Home Department in the last debate on the subject in which he went through all the details.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: He never touched it.
  5.0 P.M.
  Mr. A. LYTTELTON: If this is capable of explanation I am sure the hon. Gentleman need not shelter himself behind the Home Secretary. If this is a regular proceeding justified by precedent, it is a proceeding which does enable the Treasury to treat the amount as a Supplementary Estimate. Why treat the money as a Supplementary Estimate this year, when a much less sum was previously dealt with by Bill?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Either proceeding is perfectly regular. There are precedents for both. One precedent occurred during the right hon. Gentleman's own
  1686
  administration, when a sum nearly as large as this was taken in exactly the same way as is done by this Supplementary Estimate. It makes no difference.
  Sir FREDERICK BANBURY: It makes all the difference in the world. On any other day a Motion to report Progress would be in order.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: It was complained that the Colonial Secretary had given no details. My right hon. Friend is fully prepared to give any information on the matter, or to answer any question. The Home Secretary explained at great length the whole course by which this was suspended money. He explained, in the first place, for what reasons the money was suspended; and, secondly, why a change in policy had become desirable, owing to the fact that these reasons had not materialised, especially in connection with the strike, but partly in connection with the Navy. I understand this Vote is not objected to. Therefore it could not have been included in the original Estimates, because it was only after the crisis for which the money of the Old Sinking Fund was taken that we could apply it in this way.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: You have not given a precedent for dealing with the money in this way.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I have already pointed out that there are precedents for treating this in a Bill and precedents for treating it as a Supplementary Estimate. There are precedents for all these Estimates being outside of the control of the Auditor and Comptroller-General, and there is no precedent for their being Within his control.
  Sir J. D. REES: The discussion, so far, has related to the technical question as to the propriety with which this Estimate has been brought forward, and the propriety of bringing it forward on a day when the guillotine falls on the Estimates at ten o'clock. It seems to me that the House should have the completest control of all accounts for such services, but, apart from that, if we come to the merits, I am so pleased that this sum is to be allotted in this way, that I shall not join in the criticism to which hon. Members have already given such full expression. So far as the merits of the Estimate goes, it seems to me extremely satisfactory that this Grant should be made by Supplementary Estimate, be it within the rules of order or

  1687
  not. The fact that the money is to be allotted for this purpose must be regarded as extremely satisfactory. My hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury (Sir Clement Hill) referred to the possibility of ultimately selling this Uganda Railway, or getting it in some way into private hands. As one of those interested in the spread of communication by railway by private enterprise in Central Africa, I shall only say how glad I am that the Colonial Office—on all other occasions I have invariably adversely criticised the finance of the Government—is making such an extremely good use of the money at its disposal. I am bound to say as the result of the communications I have had with financiers and others in business, that they have nothing but satisfaction to express as to the impartiality, courtesy, and energy, of the right hon. Gentleman in endeavouring to promote what is necessary in the way of development. This is not a party matter at all, except as regards the question of the propriety of the manner in which the money is being dealt with. It is a matter of opening up regions which supply the best cotton for England, tobacco, and many other most valuable products. The Colonial Office is simply continuing action which has already had most beneficial effects in East Africa.
  I remember when I sat on the other side of the House I tried to get at the total cost of the Uganda Railway. I totalled up the figures I obtained from the Treasury and found the whole amount with interest, was something like £13,000,000. I believe it was money extremely well spent. I do not believe the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. T. M. Healy) would contest that from the point of view of the Irish taxpayer, because the prosperity of the Empire must affect the interests of Ireland, so long as that country remains, as I hope it will do, part of the United Kingdom. For my part, I congratulate the Government on having done this good thing, at any rate, by providing money for Uganda. Anybody concerned in any degree in the development of the British Empire knows what these regions can do in the way of supplying cotton of precisely the kind suited to the wants of Manchester. It is a matter of extreme importance that these territories should be developed, and I can only congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on what he has done on this behalf, and on the impression created in the City among those occupied in this business.
  1688
  My hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury gave various figures regarding the great improvement that has resulted in the condition of Uganda from the railway already constructed. The same arguments apply to the work to be done under this Supplementary Estimate. It is not so long ago that a missionary occupied in Uganda was informed by one of his converts that the native word he used for the translation of "repentance" was not exactly what the missionary intended to describe. He pictured the case of an armed man who, having met two men both carrying goods, only killed and robbed one. He said that repentance meant the regret of the robber that he did not also kill the other man. That story merely illustrates the condition of this population. It was sunk in every kind of ignorance, violence, and anarchy, and solely owing to the construction of the railway a condition of comparative prosperity has been brought about in the country. I am glad to see that the right hon. Gentleman is determined to advance in this behalf during the time he occupies his present office.
  There are 600 miles of railway already constructed, and, I believe, the trains run more than twice a week right up to Victoria Nyanza. The place is full of churches and worshippers, and the condition of the country has been completely changed. A point has been made as to the method by which these railways are constructed. I do not think the manner in which the construction of the original line was carried out is open to the criticism to which it has been often exposed. It was not a line made by the Crown Agents. It was made by a committee on which the Foreign Office, the Crown Agents, and the Treasury were represented. I believe that an equal regard for the pockets of the taxpayers will inspire the Colonial Office in making the improvements to which this Grant is to be devoted. I do think there is a question how far sums of money which could be placed at the disposal of the right hon. Gentleman should be allocated. The allocation in regard to this line is good, and I highly approve of it. No doubt the right hon. Gentleman pressed the Treasury very' hard in order to get such a comparatively large sum, and I must say it is to his credit that he succeeded. It is only proper to mention that while doing what he has done he has not been solely concerned with Uganda, but has given proper attention to the wants of other Colonies for which Grants are urgently needed. So far from

  1689
  the method of making this Grant to Uganda by way of loan being an aggravation, I should call it an alleviation of anything savouring of irregularity which might apply to the Treasury in the matter. Does the hon. and learned Member (Mr. T. M. Healy) think that the money should be given in the form of a Grant once for all, or that it should be a loan under which plan the money will come back? I think the Secretary to the Treasury fairly met the hon, and learned Member as regards precedents.
  It would, I think, be a most regrettable matter if allotments of this character were too severely scrutinised so as to put such fear into the hearts of the right hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury Bench as would prevent them from doing a good thing when they feel so inclined. I do beg the hon. and learned Gentleman to mitigate the severity of his criticism. We all know how keen and stinging his criticisms are, but I would beg him on this occasion to take into account, not so much the manner in which this is done, but the exceedingly good character of the thing which is done. It is a good thing for the British Empire, British trade, the cotton trade, and the tobacco trade. Why does he condemn a proceeding which is so likely to result from every point of view in adding to the prosperity of the British Empire? I would ask the Colonial Secretary as regards the expenditure of this money, whether he will take duly into account the lessons learned on previous occasions from the strong criticisms which have been made as to the cost per mile for railway construction in Uganda as compared with that in Sierra Leone and other parts of the Empire. That, I know, depends upon physical features which are not within the power of the Colonial Office to deal with. I think any Member of this House who has been occupied in endeavouring after his degree to develop these distant regions in Africa, would be absolutely wanting in his duty if he did not get up, and without any regard whatever to party considerations, deal with the actual merits of the Vote before the Committee, and express his very strong approval of it upon the merits.
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Harcourt): The right hon. Gentleman opposite has asked me for information on this Vote which I shall be very happy to afford him. I will not enter upon the discussion which has taken place between the hon. and learned
  1690
  Member for North-East Cork (Mr. T. M. Healy) and my right hon. Friend (Mr. Masterman), as to the method by which this money was provided. He will agree at once that my object was to secure the money from the Treasury.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: Last year only a quarter of a million pounds was asked, and this year it has grown to half a million.
  Mr. HARCOURT: Last year a loan was made of a quarter of a million pounds, and of course that was all that was desired at the time. I wish to thank the hon. Member who spoke last for his appreciation of the provision which is being made for these two Protectorates. The hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Sir C. Hill) asked whether any provision was being made for insurance for the steamers on Lake Victoria. A fund is being added to now to deal with the question of the insurance of those steamers. He suggested that while we have provided a considerable sum of money for the expansion of the Uganda Railway, we should also proceed to sell it immediately to some private speculator. I am not sure, if he would consult the settlers and traders in East Africa and Uganda, that they would feel that such a proceeding would tend to an immediate lowering of their rates or to the advantage of traders in those particular districts. Therefore, I am providing another half-million pounds for the purposes of this railway and the development of the products of the country. The hon. Member, like Oliver asking for more, comes down this afternoon and demands two or three more railways, without really expressing any appreciation of what has been done. He suggests a new railway from Nimile to Gondokoro, and an extension of the Thika Railway to Fort Hall. All the railways which he suggests might be useful and profitable extensions which could be made, and I should be glad to consider them whenever I am happy enough to have means at my disposal for that purpose. The half-million provided under this Vote is divided into two portions. £375,000 is for the British East Africa and Uganda Railway. Of that £375,000: £300,000 is allotted to stations, buildings, equipments, staff quarters, and passing places on the lines, and engines and rolling stock.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: On the existing lines?
  Mr. HARCOURT: Not only on the existing lines, but on the extensions projected. In reference to the financial success of the

  1691
  Uganda Railway, the figures may be interesting. The gross receipts in 1903–4 were £132,000. They are estimated to be in the year 1912–13 £424,000. The loss on the working of the Uganda Railway in 1903–4 was £60,000. The profit estimated for the current year is £135,000. In passing from these figures, may I express my deep regret at the recent death of Mr. Currie, who has been manager to the Uganda Railway practically since its commencement, and take this opportunity of paying a tribute to the great services which he has rendered to the railway and to those two Protectorates. The reason why I ask for this money this year is that is has been discovered—those discoveries are made from day to day, and cannot be foreseen—that the railway was no longer equal to the immense mass of work placed upon it. There has been a great and sudden and unexpected development of production in both these Protectorates. Produce is delayed and damaged by this delay on wharves, platforms, and sidings without protection, and the complete absence of sheds and stores to deal with such an immense mass of material as is now being brought up. Further equipment is therefore necessary both for goods and passenger stock, engines, sidings, quarters, and crossing stations on the railway. Some improvements are also necessary in the Ports on Lake Victoria, and £35,000 is devoted out of this Estimate for that purpose and for the provision of another large cargo steamer on the lake. The £325,000 is completed by a sum of £40,000 for the improvement of the Kilindini deep-water pier, not so much the length of the pier itself, though work will be done in that direction, as the greater facility for handling traffic with cranes, sidings, and wharves. The remaining £125,000 is devoted to the Uganda Protectorate. Of that £25,000 goes to the railway from Kampala to Port Bell. The present transport facilities in those places are wholly inadequate to meet the trade which has sprung up, and an outlet is required for the merchandise, which is hopelessly congested. The lake service and the Uganda are all the time losing traffic owing to the fact that a great quantity of material is waiting its turn on the line. It is possible that this railway to Port Bell may form the beginning of a trunk line, which will eventually cross Uganda and tap the boundaries of the Congo State and the districts south and west of Lake Albert.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: Will that be done by Supplemental Estimate?
  Mr. HARCOURT: I will refer the hon. Gentleman to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is only a short line as far as Port Bell, and it is estimated to cost £3,000 per mile, which is the same cost as that of the Buroga Railway, recently completed, as this line will pass through a country almost exactly similar. The remainder of the sum of £100,000 will be devoted to improving communication on the eastern side of the Uganda. There is a rich cotton district around Lake Kioga. The fleet on that lake has recently been increased, and the cotton brought down by steamer to the railway at Namasagali. That serves well enough the cotton districts, which are within easy reach of the shores of the lake, but beyond that and out of reach of ordinary porters are great regions, which are well fitted for cotton growing—there was a great growth of cotton developed there within the last year or two—but the cotton must be brought down to Lake Kioga, or direct to Lake Victoria, in order to get on the railway, and so on to Mombasa. The British Cotton Growers' Association made representations to me this spring of a very serious danger that the natives who were being encouraged to grow cotton might not be able to dispose of it, and that that fact would do incalculable damage, not only at the moment, but as long as the memory of the failure remained, as the, natives would not be inclined to grow a crop which they could not market, and they could not be induced to grow it again until this loss had been provided against. The fact is that Lancashire wants much more cheap cotton. It wants cotton of just the sort and quality which this country has produced and is producing, and it is by these facilities that we hope to help to obtain that cotton in the near future. In the East of Uganda we propose to open up communications, both by lake and railway, by making metalled roads which are suitable for motor traffic, and on that £100,000 will be spent, because it has been found that porterage on the head by bush tracks is much too costly for the materials we have now to bring down to the lake and the railway. I only hope, after the general approval which has been given to the1 policy of developing these countries, that the way in which the money is being obtained will not cause hon. Members to oppose it.
  Mr. GEORGE LLOYD: On the technical question as to how this money is being obtained we are all so accustomed to the Government's dodges in methods of procedure in this House that, without any special knowledge on this subject, I should feel inclined to agree with all that was said by the hon. Member (Mr. T. M. Healy) behind me; but my argument only goes so far, and I am very anxious to support, in every way I can, any expenditure which goes to develop railways in East Africa. The real trouble is, I think, that we do not like to spend these large sums of money quite suddenly and unexpectedly; and if the Government had pursued a policy of steady development of this railway for several years, instead of coming to a sudden recognition of its necessity, it would have been better. As the right hon. Gentleman has said, he has only just realised that there was a great block of traffic and a great need of development.
  Mr. HARCOURT: I did not say that I had only just realised. I said the facts had only just arisen.
  Mr. LLOYD: The general statement was that new developments had taken place which he had not understood or appreciated before. All I can say is that the people of East Africa have been clamouring for more railway facilities and more rolling stock, and have been able to demonstrate to the Government for months and years past that they could not get their stuff away from port, and, as everybody in this House knows, cotton has recently been burned in Uganda because the Government have not been able to produce a few hundred thousand pounds for railways. I think on an occasion like this that what we want in East Africa and other countries where railways are needed is not a panic policy of sudden development of railways, but an annual amount spent on these railways and a proportionate amount spent on the development of the resources of the country. There is very good reason why we should go ahead with the East African railway development. So far as I understand, a great deal of the produce of German East Africa is being carried by the Uganda Railway over that line, and the more rapidly we extend the operation of the Uganda Railway and its branches, the more we shall be carrying British produce and encouraging British industry in British East Africa, and not so much that of German East Africa. I do not think
  1694
  that anyone who has listened to the figures just given with regard to the profits made by the Uganda Railway recently can doubt that the whole country is ready for a further extension of railway. The right, hon. Gentleman suggests that we ought to be very grateful to him for what he is doing. I, for one, am very grateful. It is very late in coming; we wanted it very much earlier, just as we had to press for years to get a line of British steamships down to East Africa, and that was recognised far too late, yet it is now a tremendous success. So little has been done that I think the right hon. Gentleman has not made out a case why he should not go further in regard to the development of that country. The more-that is done the more rapidly will we get returns from it, and the more rapidly will we get an increase of cotton, which is vitally necessary to Lancashire. I do hope that there will be no opposition to this Supplementary Estimate, and that the right hon. Gentleman will pay some real attention to the demands which are made from every quarter of this House, for it is necessary that more money should be devoted to East Africa for the purpose of its continued and increasing development.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I rise for the purpose of supporting the hon. and learned Member below the Gangway (Mr. T. M. Healy) in his very excellent criticism of the financial methods of the Government. As I understand what has arisen is this: We have been asked to pass a Supplementary Estimate of £500,000. Supplementary to what? Supplementary to £23,000. That is an extremely bad method of finance. Even at the beginning of the year the Colonial Secretary considered that £68,000 was all that was necessary to spend, and I fail to see from his speech how it was that he did not realise five months ago that all these various things would be required. Steamers on Lake Victoria, if necessary, in July, surely were necessary in January or February, and if the right hon. Gentleman had taken the trouble to make a correct estimate we should have been spared all this bad method of finance, and' probably his proposal would have gone through quickly. But as the hon. and learned Gentleman below the Gangway says, to talk of a sum of £375,000 as supplementary to £23,000 is a misuse of the English language. The right hon. Gentleman was asked whether the £23,000 was for particular objects, and he said he did not know. If he did not know, how can

  1695
  he say that this is a Supplementary Vote? I think this is a new Service and not a Supplementary Vote at all. We all know that last Friday, unfortunately, by a very small majority those of us who endeavoured to protect the ancient privileges of the House with regard to financial measures were defeated, and consequently Standing Order 15 which did not allow of Supplementary Estimates for new Services was done away with, and an opportunity was given for this particular Vote for this new Service on the last day—the guillotine day—of Supply. The hon. and learned Gentleman, if I may say so, is absolutely right when he says that it is a scandal to come down to the House and ask for £375,000 as supplementary to a sum of £23,000. It cannot for a moment be admitted to be supplementary to that £23,000; I do not believe it for a moment. Yet the Government come on the last day, the guillotine day, when a Motion to report Progress cannot be submitted, to ask us to vote this immense sum. What is the result? It is that we cannot have a proper discussion of either this or the other Vote. One of these Votes must be sacrificed, and the hon. and learned Gentleman is absolutely correct when he says that the Committee is losing control over financial matters. It may be quite right that this large sum of money should be spent in Uganda, but it cannot be right that it should be spent in an unauthorised manner. If the object is a good one, then there is all the more reason for coming to the Committee and affording an opportunity for discussion. If the Government have something to their credit, it is right that the public should know for once that they are doing something which is right. But it cannot be right to attempt to smuggle this thing through in this kind of manner, and I am rather sorry that my hon. Friend, the Member for Nottingham (Sir J. D. Rees) thinks that this is a very excellent method of spending the money. Apparently, if he considers the object is good, it does not matter how the money is obtained. I protest against that, and I do hope that hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite will see the reason why we are losing all financial control over the Estimates. I do not doubt for a moment that they think all their proposals are good.
  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George): What about your view?
  Sir F. BANBURY: MY view is that they are nearly always bad.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: This one?
  Sir F. BANBURY: Oh, no; I am not dealing with the merits of this matter at all.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I would remind the hon. Baronet that the subject for discussion is the Supplementary Estimate.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I think I am in order in saying that I do not consider that this Vote should have been brought forward in this way, and that is all I wish to say. I wish to support the hon. and learned Member for North-East Cork in his criticism that this is not the proper way in which to bring forward the Vote. As to the expenditure of the money I have nothing whatever to say. The precedents quoted by the right hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Master-man) have nothing whatever to do with the case before us. They have no bearing at all, and they do not in any way mitigate the great offence which is being committed at the present moment—this bringing forward of a Supplementary Estimate for a practically new service on an original estimate some fifteen times smaller than the Supplementary Estimate. Whoever heard of a Supplementary Estimate of £400,000 on a sum of £20,000? Really, it is finance gone wrong. I do hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will in future exercise a little more care over the way in which these things are brought forward. He is the guardian of the public purse, and there should be more care exercised in regard to these large sums which are asked for.
  Mr. WALTER GUINNESS: There is no doubt whatever that the financial procedure by which the Government propose to get this money is no new instance of the vicious practice of removing matters from the control of the House, and leaving the expenditure of money in the unfettered discretion of Ministers of the Crown. Of course, we have been told this afternoon that there are small precedents where Grants-in-Aid, and even small loans, have been obtained by this method; but there has been no case whatever of so large a sum as half a million being voted in this way. Fifty thousand pounds is the largest case of a loan.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The sum of £400,000 has been voted in this way.
  Mr. W. GUINNESS: My point is that there may have been Supplementary Estimates, but there has been no cases of loan.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: There were two sums of £200,000 each voted in this way as an advance to the Colony of the Gold Coast.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: What year?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: July, 1900, and February, 1901.
  Mr. W. GUINNESS: I think it is a most regrettable form of procedure. Where you have so little money to spend, you should spend it in the best possible way; and the Colonial Office have made various mistakes in the past allocation of funds. I do not want to say a word as to what is proposed at the present time. The mono-railway from Port Bell to Kampala is not able to cope with the traffic, and why was not a railway constructed at first? We have no control in the House of Commons, and where money is wastefully expended we know that the matter has not been properly considered at first. We have no information as to the £100,000 Grant which is to go to the improvement of the communications with the Eastern Provinces of Uganda. What kind of motor roads are we to have? At the present time, according to the interesting report on Uganda, the motor service consists of two new motor vans which, owing to the breakdown or lack of drivers through ill-health and other causes, are not very much used. What is the use of spending £100,000 on roads if you have no motor traction to go on them? Really, before asking for a sum of this size, we ought to know what the road is going to cost, what proportion is going to be spent on rolling stock, and other details which are necessary to enable this House to form an accurate judgment as to the necessity of the expenditure. I come to the expenditure on British East Africa. I have travelled over the railway there, and I think it one of the most remarkable instances of what communicacation can do for a country. You have there got a single line of railway 584 miles long, which in a very few years has absolutely revolutionised the conditions of Central Africa. It has abolished the slave traffic; it has brought within two days'
  1698
  journey Lake Victoria and Nyanza, which formerly only could be reached after a long and tedious journey of at least two months.
  This railway has absolutely made British East Africa, and it has made the country, since the year 1895, when the Protectorate was first proclaimed. It is certain that if you can only increase your communicacations you will obtain from the country an amount of wealth which few people who have not been out there can realise. In this very great area on the Equator you find it possible to produce, crops which can only be produced in temperate climates. First of all cotton is grown, and, besides other produce, there is good pasture all the year round, which affords a very promising opening for raising sheep. You have now, also, the promise of a very good yield of wheat, up to twelve bushels an acre. The exports have doubled in the last five years, and the imports have increased by one-third. The tonnage on the railway since the last report has shown in one year an increase of a quarter, while the not profit has increased by a half. The night hon. Gentleman gave a further figure which shows that in two years the net profit has absolutely doubled. In 1925 this railway will be free of debt, and all this profit will be going to the British taxpayer. In view of that fact I think it is not advisable to carry out the suggestion of the hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Sir Clement Hill) that this railway should be sold to private enterprise. There is so much necessity for improved communication in Central Africa that it is much better to let private enterprise tackle new lines and keep this railway, so that when the debt is paid off the full benefit of the increased profits may be fairly shared between the British taxpayer and the Colonists who are clamouring for lower rates. I hope that the Government will obtain this Grant, and will not only spend money in the development of the main line in East Africa, as they now suggest, but that they will bring forward further proposals for making the spur lines which are absolutely necessary to tap the cotton-growing districts.
  Major BARING: I do not wish to disagree with the policy of the right hon. Gentleman in granting money to the British East Africa Protectorate, but I should like, when he is asking the House for this considerable sum, to inquire why he has not allocated any of it to improving the communications and the facilities

  1699
  in the Juba province of the British East Africa Protectorate? I served there some ten years ago, and reading through the report issued by the Colonial Office I see it stated that it is the same to-day as it was then. It is a province entirely cut off from the remaining part of British East Africa, but at the same time is full of the greatest promise from the cotton-growing point of view. I see that the report says that if only facilities were given in the way of communication and otherwise, half a million acres could be drawn upon for cotton growing for the benefit of this country. I think that is an opportunity which the right hon. Gentleman ought to have grasped when he had this very considerable sum placed at his disposal by the Treasury. I should like to draw his attention to the fact that the Italian Government, who have the governing of the country just across the border, have been far kinder to their colonists than he has been. Two years ago, when I was in Rome, I made some inquiries as to what they were doing, and I found that they are sending out men and machinery and cattle and cotton seed, and generally developing their side of the river at some considerable expense. Nothing, however, has been done by the Colonial Office, and even at the present time the people settled in that part of the Protectorate have to depend on the Italian Government to get their telegrams through by the Italian system of wireless telegraphy. I think it would be of considerable importance to that Protectorate to advance some portion of this money, if possible, to develop that district. I should like also to ask whether anything further has been done to improve the steamship service to Mombasa. There is no doubt that the small beginning which has been made has been a conspicuous success. Although one cannot say that the steamship service should be actually connected with Uganda Railway, at the same time it is a common practice for railways to own their own steamship lines so that they run in connection. It is rather disappointing to see that so much of the traffic in passengers and cargoes which goes out of the British Protectorate is carried by foreign steamers. I should very much like to see further assistance given to the Uganda Railway and to the steamship service, to enable the development of British lines more exclusively than at present.
  Mr. SANDYS: I certainly admit that the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, the Colonial Secretary, cleared up a great many points about which I had some doubt before listening to his remarks. There are, however, one or two criticisms of perhaps a somewhat minor character, but which nevertheless raise questions with a certain amount of importance, which I should like to put to him, because he did not deal with them altogether adequately in the course of his remarks. Any criticisms that I may make with reference to this railway and the money which is being devoted to this purpose, will not in any way be directed against the general policy of expending national money for the purpose of railway development in our Colonial possessions, because I certainly believe, and I think it is generally admitted now, that the development of railway communication in all parts of the Empire as necessary both for commercial and political progress in time of peace, and is absolutely essential for military security in time of war. There is no doubt that this undertaking, the Uganda Railway, in its earlier days met with an extraordinary amount of opposition. I happened to be reading the debates which took place in this House in 1902, not in connection with the original construction of the line, but when an additional sum amounting, I think, to about £600,000 was under consideration. At that time several prominent Members belonging to the Liberal party took a very keen interest in the Uganda Railway, and did not hesitate to give utterance to the most Cassandra like prophecies as to the future of the line. One of those who was most interested in the subject and made very frequent contributions to the debate, was the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board. One of his remarks was so typical of some of his other observations, that I should like to trouble the Committee with his forecast as to the future of the line:—
  "Unless the Foreign Office was seriously impressed by the criticisms which had been delivered in the light of sound information, this expenditure of the six millions would double, and, finally, the only asset would be two long rusty steel ribbons, stretching from Mombasa to Victoria Nyanza, abandoned in despair because our policy of universal grab had landed us in trouble nearer home."
  Those prophecies have been completely falsified. The country was told at the time that this railway, from a commercial point of view, was not required, and that from a financial point of view it was doomed to failure from the first. Everybody now admits that the remarkable

  1701
  development which has taken place, both in Uganda and in British East Africa, is entirely due to the construction of this line, and, so far as the financial situation is concerned, whereas the line was run at a loss of about £50,000 for the first twelve months, six years ago that loss was converted into a profit of £56,000, and we now have it on the authority of the right hon. Gentleman himself that the last year's working will show a profit of £134,000. The Prime Minister in a speech which he made here a few days ago, when he was advocating this advance of money, summed up the situation in these words:—
  "A good rate of interest will be paid, the loan will be redeemed, and then the money will come back to the Sinking Fund."
  There are one or two points about which I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman with reference to the allocation of this money. First of all, he referred to the enormous increase in cotton production in Uganda: I believe that in 1906–7 there were 858 cwts. exported from Uganda, with a value of about £1,000. That had gone up in the year 1910–11 to 83,000 cwts. of a value of £168,000, and I understand the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer is responsible for the forecast that for this year the amount of cotton exported will probably amount to over 100,000 cwts. All that has entailed a very heavy strain on the locomotives and other rolling stock generally of the line, which was built in the expectation of much lighter traffic and much less frequent service. The right hon. Gentleman has given us some indication as to how much is going to be spent on locomotives and rolling stock, so that I will not press that point. The point I want to deal with is with regard to the allocation of the money as between those new lines which are going to be constructed. I understand that there is a private line to run to Lake Kioga, which is under course of construction, and the money for which is being found by a private company, though the Uganda Railway are ultimately going to take over the running of that line. There is also a light railway, to which the right hon. Gentleman alluded in a previous speech, called the Fort Hall Railway, and which is to an extent a feeder of the Uganda Railway, and upon the construction of which considerable progress has already been made. As I understood from the right hon. Gentleman's previous speech, the expenses of those constructions are going to be defrayed out of the £250,000 which was
  1702
  allocated to Uganda out of the realised surplus of the Budget of 1910–11. Another portion of this same sum is going to be devoted to the provision of a new water supply for Mombasa, and also for improvements in the deep water dock at Kilindini, which is close to Mombasa, and which is the ocean port for British East Africa and the ocean terminus of the Uganda Railway.
  6.0 P.M.
  What I want to ascertain from the right hon. Gentleman is how much of that original sum of £250,000 is going to be expended on this deep water dock. I understand from what he said that a sum of £40,000 is going to be expended out of the present sum which is under consideration. I should like to know what is the total amount which he is prepared to devote to this very necessary purpose, because in my view it is just as important that there should be better provision made for ocean-going steamers at Kilindini for the discharge and loading of cargoes there as the development in the line itself, and it is, I understand, in some people's view even more urgent, because the state of trade from the shipping point of view at Mombasa is in some respects rather unsatisfactory. As the right hon. Gentleman of course is aware, some years ago the old Union Steamship Company had a regular service to British East Africa, which, unfortunately, they were obliged to give up owing to its proving unremunerative, but the British India Company has for thirty years maintained a regular service to Mombasa or Kilindini. This British service has been maintained under circumstances of considerable difficulty, largely owing to the competition of the German East Africa line. As is generally known, the German Government are doing everything in their power to foster German interests along the East African coast, and, in furtherance of that policy, they pay an annual subsidy of no less, I believe, than £67,000 to the British East Africa line. That line also gets the advantage, which is shared by the German trader or the German manufacturer of the inland towns in Germany, of a through railway rate which enables the German manufacturer to send his goods to the German ports and have them shipped from there to East Africa at the same, or in some cases at a lower rate than the ordinary port to port rate. It is this State-aided competition under which British shipping lines have worked at such considerable disadvantage. As has

  1703
  been pointed out, the Union-Castle Line, I think in 1910, started a service down the West Coast of Africa, calling at Cape Town, and then proceeding up the East African Coast as far north as Mombasa. The same or the next year the same company started another line running direct from Southampton, through the Suez Canal, to Mombasa by the northern route. When that new service was under consideration the British Government were approached and asked whether, in view of the fact that the German Government gave such a handsome subsidy to their line, the British Government could see their way to afford some pecuniary support to the British line. The Government expressed their sympathetic interest, but were not able to find the money. I believe, however, they entered into a contract that all passengers and goods controlled by the Government should be carried by that line. Since that service through the Suez Canal was started it has been maintained by regular monthly sailings, and I understand that it is proposed to build larger and finer vessels for this traffic.
  This is the point about which I should like to get some information. One of the real hindrances to British trade with East Africa is, not only the German competition, but also the totally inadequate facilities for loading and unloading cargo at Kilindini. There are no deep water berths for large steamers enabling them to come alongside to load or discharge their cargoes. The consequence is that all these operations have to be done into lighters, and that is a slow process, involving considerable delay, and entailing serious cost to the company. I have been given to understand that Sir Percy Girouard, who, unfortunately, recently resigned the Governorship of the Protectorate, had a scheme, which, I believe was submitted to the Government, though we have never had any official statement with regard to it, for the general improvement of the shipping facilities at Kilindini. It was a large scheme, which, in his opinion, was absolutely essential to the future development of East Africa, and for enabling the country to get the full advantage of the transport over the Uganda Railway. Is it intended, generally speaking, to carry out a scheme of this comprehensive character, and how much money are the Government going to spend on the improvement of the port? Personally, I welcome the
  1704
  fact that the Government are ready to spend money on the development of the port, of the railway, and of our East African possessions generally. I hope they are prepared to approach the question in an even more generous spirit, and that if it is found necessary further sums may be available in the future for the same purpose. I believe that in these Protectorates we have a vast area of immense possibilities, and that if money is expended now on well-considered plans we shall in the future be repaid many times over by the development of a country which is certainly destined to become one of the great sources of wealth and strength to the British Empire as a whole.
  Mr. EVELYN CECIL: I do not propose to criticise at any length the procedure with regard to this Supplementary Estimate. Other Members have done so very fully, and I endorse what they have said. It is certainly an unusual procedure to have an original Estimate one-sixteenth of the Supplementary Estimate, and one feels inclined to ask to what limit Supplementary Estimates are likely to go in the future. The fact that the Estimate is brought on on a day when it is impossible to report Progress, it being a day on which the Votes are taken en bloc at ten o'clock adds to the gravity of the situation. But it is a much pleasanter task to praise than to blame, and as regards the general objects to which the Vote is to be applied I have in the main only praise to give the right hon. Gentleman. I have taken a general interest in East Africa ever since I came up the coast in 1899 and observed how largely the German East Africa Steamship Company was dominating the situation and introducing German trade as against British trade. It was seeing that that induced me to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the whole question of steamship subsidies and direct British steamship communication with East Africa. That Committee, of which I had the honour of being chairman, sat for two years, and one of its recommendations was directed towards inducing the Government to assist direct British steamship communication with that coast. The Government was somewhat dilatory on the matter. I am not speaking particularly of one party or the other. In general, I suppose, the Colonial Office and the Treasury were not disposed to take a specially favourable view of that particular recommendation. It is only recently that a successful steamship line has been

  1705
  started by the Union-Castle Company. It is true that they are guaranteed any Government passengers or goods that may be sent, but beyond that they have had no special encouragement from the Government. That they afford an important means of communication, there is no doubt, and I believe they have done much and that any direct steamship communication will do much to develop our great Imperial interests in that part of the world. I hail with satisfaction any measure which goes to increase the prosperity of the country either by assisting steamship communication to a new country such as this or by improving the railway and its general prosperity, as is now proposed.
  I am a great believer in the future of East Africa, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will expend much of this money in the directions he has indicated. In the first place, I would urge the importance of what he has said with regard to making roads throughout Uganda, and more particularly in the new cotton-growing areas. These areas are extending very rapidly inland from the Lake Victoria Nyanza, and unless lines of communication are provided in the way of roads it will be impossible to get the cotton to market. This will involve enormous loss to the native growers whom we have encouraged to grow cottonseed, and will consequently be a great setback to the industry in the country. There is also a large soda area in East Africa, which I believe it is the aïm of companies to develop. I suppose there is a certain amount of speculation in the adventure, but it would be worth while bearing in mind that any lines of communication and any roads in the direction of Lake Magadi are likely to benefit both the development of cotton and the possible development of soda. The Colonial Secretary referred to the necessity of increasing the rolling stock and the general facilities of the Uganda Railway. That, also, is a matter of importance which I am glad has come to his notice. Almost my only criticism of his speech would be that when dealing with this particular matter he said that a development of this character cannot be foreseen. If he asked anyone cognisant with the circumstances of East Africa he would be told that this great congestion of traffic on the Uganda Railway has been foreseen for a considerable time by those resident in the district, and that it is by no means a matter which has suddenly arisen. The congestion has been growing.
  1706
  I was informed the other day, by a gentleman who knows the country well, that there were only some fifty-five trucks available, when there ought to have been a very much larger number, to bring the produce to market, and that to those who look round the country and note the large increases in the growth of maize, rubber, coffee, cotton, and other products that grow very well in that soil, it seems a pity that this development of the railway was not sooner taken in hand.
  Another point to which I wish to direct attention concerns the considerable taxes on machinery brought into the country. The question is of most importance concerning the machinery expressly needed for development purposes. I fancy that the taxes are imposed by the Uganda Government. I submit that they ought to be reduced or abated, and it is because I believe they are practically regulated by the Colonial Office that I am calling the right hon. Gentleman's attention to them. In other countries not so advanced as our own there seems to be no question as to how these development matters should be regulated. In Mexico and in Peru, I am told, taxes are taken off the machinery that is imported for the development of the country. It certainly is unfortunate if we are hindering development by unduly taxing machinery, which would so much assist us when imported. My information in this respect is strengthened by one or two sentences which I see here in the last Report from Uganda. On page 6 there is a statement:—
  "That the quantity of rice imported is still very considerable, notwithstanding the efforts to encourage local cultivation of the grain. Large quantities are obtained from German East Africa, where special machinery for cleaning the grain has lately been imported, with the result that the quality has much improved, and it is now more generally used by all classes."
  That seems to show that the Germans—always very acute in these colonising matters—have introduced at an early stage machinery into German East Africa, thus advancing their exportation of rice from that country, while it seems to be handicapping our own industry in British East Africa. I think that is a point which the right hon. Gentleman would do well to bear in mind. If he can see his way to remit some of these taxes on machinery used for the development of the country it would be a desirable course. While I am referring to this Uganda Report I should like also to call attention to one

  1707
  other sentence which strikes me as worthy of some notice. On page 8 I read:—
  "In most cases the better class of all goods come from the United Kingdom, and the cheaper qualities from foreign countries."
  That is not necessarily so much a matter for the Government, perhaps, although they can do something towards calling the attention of our manufacturers to it. But it does show that our manufacturers are still too much inclined to manufacture the very best article for exportation to our Colonies when our Colonies do not ask for it, and that they will not manufacture the kind of article which is asked for, and which therefore our Colonists get from some foreign country. That has been the complaint for many years. I have expressed it more than once, certainly outside, if not inside, this House. I think it is a very important point to which the attention of our manufacturers ought to be specially directed. However good may be the particular article which they manufacture, it is practically useless if it is not the thing asked for in the Colonies. If the Colonies need large supplies of special articles, and they cannot get them, even after persistent inquiries from this country, the only thing for them to do is to get them from foreign countries. I remember perfectly well, when I was in Natal some ten years ago or more, being told about the case of a pruning knife. My manufacturer friend had over and over again tried to get what he wanted from this country. He had been sent a selection of pruning knives which cost about twice as much as he desired to pay. It was intimated that it was not the habit of the manufacturers to make the form of pruning knife that he required. The result was that he got the whole of his supplies from the United States, and the British manufacturer was left out in the cold. This particular sentence in the Uganda Report seems to me to suggest that much the same kind of thing is still going on. I hope by calling attention to it in the Debate that it may be a hint to the British manufacturers to look after their own interests.
  There is another point which has been referred to by several hon. Members and also by the right hon. Gentleman the Colonial Secretary: that is the fact that he proposes to give £40,000 to the Kilindini Harbour deep-water pier at the end of the Uganda Railway. That work, I believe, has not yet even been begun. I would urge that that particular matter be pressed
  1708
  on with the greatest speed in the power of His Majesty's Government. It is hardly realised by those who are not more or less familiar with what goes on in the country what the condition of that particular harbour is. At the present moment ships lie out in Kilindini Harbour and are unloaded by lighters. The congestion on the single wharf which at present exists, and which is a very small one, is little short of appalling. There is no electric light on this wharf, and the result is that no work can go on after six o'clock at night; though no doubt ships' lights can be employed for putting the cargoes from the ships on to the lighters. The result is that twice in every twenty-four hours every lighter is full and waiting its turn to discharge at the wharf. Only this year large oceangoing steamers have taken an enormous time to discharge their cargoes because of the absence of a deep-water pier. In March last the Union-Castle steamer "Gascon" took thirteen to fourteen days to discharge 4,160 tons. In May last the "Gaika" took six days to discharge 2,200 tons. If that is not sufficient evidence to get the deep-water pier pressed on rapidly, I really do not know what is. I hope, therefore, that His Majesty's Government and the Uganda Government will devote their attention, perhaps more particularly to the three or four points I have mentioned: increase of roads throughout Uganda, especially in the new cotton-growing area; that they will do all they can to improve the rolling stock; the general administration and the facilities of the Uganda Railway; and that they will, if possible, remove or reduce the taxes which now exist on machinery which is really for the development of the country; and that they will press on., perhaps more than all the others, the deep-water pier in Kilindini Harbour.
  Sir JOSEPH WALTON: I question whether any Supplementary Estimate that has ever been brought under the consideration of this Committee was received with greater approval from all parts of the House than the one now under consideration. My hon. Friend opposite spoke of having been up the East African coast ten or twelve years ago. I happened to have been up that coast to British East Africa and Uganda within the last two months. His geography, if I may venture to say so, is somewhat at fault. He spoke of the railway or roads in Uganda not only giving greater facilities for the transit of cotton, but also as possibly

  1709
  opening up the great deposit of soda in Lake Magadi. Lake Magadi happens to be in the centre of British East Africa a hundred miles away from Uganda. There is at the present moment in course of construction a railway built by private enterprise from the Uganda Railway to the Kioga Lake, and before long it is hoped that the administration of British East Africa will be deriving considerable revenue as a result of the development of that undertaking. There can be no question that the Government have recognised and do recognise the need for the development of the railway system in British East Africa and also in Uganda. The Kilindini Harbour, to which reference has been made, is one of the finest land-locked, natural deep-water harbours, I imagine, on the East Coast of Africa or anywhere else. So far as I have ascertained, no delay has taken place in the building or extension of the present pier so as to make it a deep-water pier. The development of trade along that coast, and especially in British East Africa, is going on apace.
  I rejoice to know of the enterprise of the Union-Castle Company in starting a line of British steamers from a great British territory to British East Africa to further and develop British trade. So far as my information goes, I believe that that undertaking has been already a profitable one, and that it will justify the building of large steamers, and that in its future development to those who conduct it will accrue a substantial profit as a result of their enterprise. The question of railway extension in several parts of British East Africa is a question of the highest moment. We know that already the Uganda Railway has earned a net profit of 2 per cent, per annum. Given the extra traffic which will come from the branch lines that will be feeders to the main trunk line, the Uganda Railway—and especially if there is a permanent extension of the railway system in Uganda—that great undertaking, which belongs to the British taxpayer—which is being paid for by the British taxpayer—that magnificent railway system across British East Africa will, in 1925, be the property of the British taxpayer. Within a few years, too, if, as we are told, the Government are disposed to make feeder lines to the main line, and if the development of Uganda is continued in the same way, I believe that the Uganda Railway will be earning a much higher dividend than 2 per cent., and that
  1710
  its construction from every standpoint will have been abundantly justified.
  I wish that all Members of this Committee had the opportunity I had a few months ago of crossing over that great country by that railway, 600 miles from Mombasa to the Lake Victoria Nyanza. From a scenery point of view there is no railway that I have ever travelled on in the world which has the same variety. Starting in tropical regions on the coast it rises up at times to an elevation of 8,000 and 9,000 feet above the sea-level. It crosses right under the Equator, that magnificently huge tableland producing in some parts corn and cereals of every description, and in other parts coffee, rubber, and sisal, the raw material for the manufacture of hemp. [An HON. MEMBER: "What about lions?"] My hon. Friend behind me asks what about lions? I had not the privilege of seeing a lion. But I was told at the Government House at Nairobi that one came under my bedroom window. It would appear that on that occasion the people about, instead of having their rifles loaded, had them unloaded, and therefore took refuge in their own quarters. But joking apart, it is not every traveller who gets off so lightly. I was within twenty miles of the place where the brother of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs unfortunately lost his life through being mauled by a lion. I apologise for this digression, but I was led into it by an observation from my hon. Friend behind me.
  British East Africa is a huge tableland which has been worked largely by white settlers. At one place I met a gathering of thirty or forty British settlers who met to make their final arrangements for their agricultural show, and a better type of British settler could not be found in any part of the world. They spoke with enthusiasm of the country, of the hopefulness as to dairy farming, of stock raising, wheat growing in the land that they were cultivating; and the Committee will hardly be surprised when I say I came home with high hopes as to the future of British East Africa, and I am only too glad to have this opportunity of stating what my views of this great country are and of the enormous development which awaits British East Africa. I wish to say how strongly I approve of the position His Majesty's Government have taken up and the extra facilities which they are giving in the deep-water pier and in the making of such extensions in the construction of

  1711
  branch railways and, above all, the purchase of increased quantities of rolling stock. I confirm what has been already said as to the shortage of rolling stock, and all I can urge upon the Government is that they should not confine their advance to half a million, as the resources of the country will justify further loans for the rapid construction of railways and for the development of the country, with its most interesting population and delightful scenery. Therefore I hope that this is but the beginning of a further loan, the security for which could not be better than that afforded by the future of the country, which is absolutely assured under British rule.
  Reference was made to the German methods. If there is one thing in the world that I flatter myself as an Englishman upon it is that we are the best colonisers in the world, and that in the matter of colonisation our German friends are not equal to us in the success of their methods. They are far beyond us in putting up magnificent buildings for their officials. Perhaps we err upon the other side in that respect, and some of our representatives in countries like Uganda and British East Africa are afforded far less facilities in comforts of that kind and in opportunities for getting about than could be desired. I was surprised that out of the abundance of our wealth the Governor of Uganda was not allowed to have a reasonably decent motor-car. The Governor was most kind to me and took me out on the official motor-car. I think he is a most able Governor, and I think it is a pity that he should be left so long with the old ramshackle motor-car that I had the pleasure of driving with him in. I hope that the Colonial Office will bear these hints in mind, for there is no question as to the importance of the development of British East Africa and also Uganda, and I rejoice to know it has been recognised, and I trust it will be more recognised in the future and that great developments and great prosperity to the country will ensue.
  Mr. BAIRD: I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will be very much more moved by speeches from his own supporters than by anything we could say on this side of the House, and I hope he will continue his policy of development in Uganda. I hope he will not think me captious if I invite him to tell us how
  1712
  this money is to be spent, and to hope he will give us some farther explanation than the remarks he made at the beginning. He seems to have nearly committed to memory the rather inadequate description that appears on the face of the Vote as to what is to be done with the money. I should like to know more about this question of rolling stock and general development of the Uganda Railway. I see on page 26 of the last Report that the Government has undertaken to spend the sum of £350,000 in equipping the line for the purchase of rolling stock and so forth. That is with a view of dealing with the traffic which is anticipated upon the opening up of the line. I do not quite understand this question. The right hon. Gentleman has already said that there is considerable congestion, and I understand the lake is being developed with a view to bringing down an enormous quantity of soda to the coast, and that if there is congestion it would become a good deal less, and that a great deal of money will be devoted to the purposes foreshadowed in the last Report, but that only applies to 282 miles of line. The impression left upon my mind by the speech of the right hon. Gentlemon was that this extension and increase of rolling stock and other facilities was going to apply to the whole of the line, which is 585 miles. There will be a considerable difference if this sum was to be applied to the whole of the line or only to the portion affected by the soda concession. There is a statement as to what the money is to be used for—the removal of gradients, purchase of new rolling stock, the laying in of a new water supply, and so on. It is not possible to spend the money twice over, and although everybody would welcome the objects mentioned, I do not think they are as remunerative as the hon. Gentleman opposite indicated, because I do not think the return can be so great.
  Sir JOSEPH WALTON: Two per cent.
  Mr. BAIRD: If the hon. Member will consult the last Report he will find it was 1½ per cent. Of course, that is better than land in this country. No doubt hon. Members opposite cannot be expected to know what land pays; but, as a matter of fact, that is so. It is necessary to know what is the amount that is expended upon this railway. I see in the Report that it is over £5,580,000. I am under the impression that very much

  1713
  more has been paid. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could say whether the total amount is more than five and a half millions. I was certainly under the impression that it was a much larger sum. The other point upon which I wanted to ask the right hon. Gentleman was this—Whether the money is going to be spent for improving the facilities of their own line for carrying on the soda trade and if the people who got the concession have carried out their part? And whether the money is wanted for this purpose or whether it is for improvement over the whole railway? Because in the latter case you would have to spread the butter very thin, and you will not meet the requirements of the splendid development that is taking place in the country. I do not think the right hon. Gentleman need have any hesitation in spending money there, because it is well spent and remunerative. There is another point which requires some explanation, and that is with regard to the Boundary Commission. The right hon. Gentleman did not allude to that, or to how far that expenditure is furnished by the delimitation which ought to be carried out with Germany. There is another boundary, but I do not know how that stands at the present moment, and that is the southern boundary of Uganda. I think it would be desirable if the right hon. Gentleman would give us some explanation. I should be also glad if the right hon. Gentleman would say to what extent he is co-operating with the Soda Company. I see on page 26, in addition to the lines with mileage 282 running up to the lake, they have granted a Government loan for the erection of a pier and facilities for shipping, and I should be glad to know if the Government are co-operating with the Soda Company, not only in regard to the Kilidini Harbour, but also in regard to the whole line. I should like to know whether this is carried out subject to the understanding between the Government and the Soda Company, which was a very proper and legitimate part of the bargain, or because it was initiated to cover the development of the whole of the country, for although the enterprise is a very important one, it is obviously desirable to develop other interests in the country as well, and I was not clear from the speech of the right hon. Gentleman whether in the steps he is taking the whole country is being improved, or whether the primary effect is to meet obligations to the company?
  Mr. HARCOURT: I think the Committee may perhaps be prepared to hear me now upon the several points raised.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: There are several other points to be raised.
  Mr. HARCOURT: I desire to answer several of the points now, before I lose my recollection of them. The hon. Gentleman asked about the roads in the eastern part of Uganda. As the hon. Member knows, there is already a road there on the Magadi Soda Railway. The total length will be about 100 miles, and it will serve a large part of that territory.
  Mr. WALTER GUINNESS: Does that include any rolling stock?
  Mr. HARCOURT: No, that sum is devoted to roads in Eastern Uganda, apart from the rolling stock, and it is a separate amount.
  Mr. WALTER GUINNESS: £100,000-seems a lot for 100 miles of road.
  Mr. HARCOURT: I am blamed if I put down railways at £3,000 a mile, and I am equally blamed if I put a metal motor road through a rather difficult country at £1,000 a mile. Of course, if this road is constructed more cheaply I shall make more miles of it. The hon. Member for Winchester asked for the diversion of some of these funds for roads in the direction of Udat, but the time has not yet come for that point, and the money for that purpose is not here. I cannot divert to those districts money which has been provided for other purposes more urgently required. Experiments are being made on the Juba River under my direction. Our expectations in regard to the expenditure upon cotton growing under the circumstances have been thoroughly justified. A complaint has been made with regard to a want of telephonic communication in these districts. I am glad to say that a local system of wireless telegraphy is now being set up, and it is pretty certain that Nairobi will become one of the steps of our wirer less chain round the Empire. It will practically be a step between Aden and Pretoria, and so on to Australia viâ India. An allusion has been made to the East Coast steamship service, and I am glad to be able to say that that service is likely to be considerably improved in character in the very near future. The hon. Member for Shrewsbury, earlier in the Debate, inquired whether any of this money which is being

  1715
  voted now was going to be used for the development of the Uganda Railway to increase the traffic on the Magadi Soda Railway. The railway which the hon. Member refers to was made by private enterprise, and the £360,000 alluded to by the hon. Member was provided in a previous year for this purpose, and it is all going to be spent upon the development of the Uganda Railway. With regard to the £100,000 provided last year for the deep-water pier at Kilindini Harbour, the hon. Member is in error in thinking it is not being spent. It is true that at the time the report was being written it was not being spent, but the work is now in progress, and £40,000 is to be devoted out of this loan partly to the enlargement of that pier, and mainly to the provision of larger staging to deal more rapidly with the traffic.
  Mr. BAIRD: Is that separate from the soda traffic?
  Mr. HARCOURT: Yes, it is entirely separate from the £100,000 provided for the deep-water pier last year and £40,000 provided for the development at Kilindini Harbour this year.
  Mr. ASHLEY: On this railway can the trains run alongside of the ships?
  Mr. HARCOURT: I am not quite sure, but the railway will run in the most convenient way. I am not quite sure whether the question of the fiscal duties in Uganda is very germane to this Vote. But the hon. Member for Aston Manor (Mr. Evelyn Cecil) protested against the hardship inflicted on the agricultural and the trading community by the heavy duties imposed upon agricultural and industrial machinery. It is, of course, quite true that heavy duties on machinery, whether agricultural or industrial, are always a draw-tack to an undeveloped or even to a highly developed country like our own. The hon. Member, I am sure, will be pleased to know that in Uganda all agricultural implements and machinery and all industrial machinery to which he has so piteously alluded are wholly exempt from Import Duty.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: When you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, put a Question from the Chair, you put it in the form of a Grant of so much money to His Majesty. Now a Grant and a loan are two absolutely different things. In the past you have always dealt with a loan by Statute, and last year,
  1716
  when you wanted £250,000 for this country, you put it into an Act of Parliament founded upon a Resolution in Committee of Ways and Means, and then you gave this House all the regular opportunities it gets thereby for discussing certain proposals. If that had been done in this case I should have had nothing to say in regard to this matter. I object to the new procedure which has been adopted, and I maintain that if this procedure continues to be adopted all the power of the House of Commons over its Supply is at an end. Let the House think for a moment. As we know, it is illegal to raise money without having an object to which you intend to apply it. When these Estimates were presented to the House for all those interested in places where the Governors want motor cars so badly you intended to spend £80,000 and no more upon this Vote. When you threw down these Estimates upon the Table four or five months ago all you asked for was £80,000. Supposing at the beginning of the season His Majesty had asked for £80,000 and then suddenly asked for £580,000, what would be said of the monarch who came forward with a proposition of that sort? You would ask, "How have your Majesty's necessities speeded up so enormously?" The Government are in exactly the same position as the monarch would be in that case. You came down here three months ago and you asked £80,000 for this service and no more, and therefore I am entitled, coming from a poor country, to ask where the necessity is for this expenditure, and for your suddenly coming down to this House for a larger amount. How has this occasion arisen? It has arisen because the Chancellor of the Exchequer has impounded £6,500,000. I can see this just as if I had been present at the Cabinet meeting which discussed how this money should go. This £6,500,000 could not be hung up, and so you gave the Navy an extra £1,000,000. I do not think the Army got much, but the Colonial Secretary said, "Oh, give me £500,000 for East Africa." Evidently the right hon. Gentleman got the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a soft mood, and the right hon. Gentleman replied, "Yes, here is £500,000 for you." Let us see the effect of that procedure on this House. At that time the Estimates had been introduced, and the Ways and Means Committee Resolution had been passed, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer melted to the demands of the Colonial Secretary. Observe the evil that has

  1717
  occurred. You had your Estimates presented. If the right hon. Gentleman had distributed his £6,500,000 on Budget night, these temptations would not have arisen. The Estimates would have remained in regular order, and you would not have been driven to do what you are now doing. As one who has considered this question for a good many years I say this method is abhorrent as compared with the older method of dealing with the finance of this House. What have you done? There may be exceptions which I will not go into at this moment, but in this case, instead of giving a Grant-in-Aid which has been hitherto provided only by Statute, you have on this occasion provided a loan, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in effect to the Colonial Secretary, "It is very hard to vote away half a million and there will sure to be some grumbling about it, and therefore we shall have to go through the farce of calling it a loan." There will probably be a Public Works Loan Bill, and then the £500,000 for Uganda will be written off. I want to know this. It is an important point. Does the Government regard it as part of the normal procedure of this House that an Appropriation Bill, which has hitherto been the constitutional method by which we have given Grants to the Crown, and Grants only, shall in future be made the medium by which we shall give loans to the Colonies? I say with great deference and respect that the precedent the right hon. Gentleman gave me is no precedent at all. Of course, one does not like in a case of this kind contradicting the head of a great Department, with a number of officials to assist him. We have to run and get the book from the Library, and very often the Treasury has already got it. So I cannot lay hands on the very Estimates to which the right hon. Gentleman referred me; but I take the Statute, which, after all, is the thing every man should go to, and, instead of it being a loan such as this, it is the case of an absolute Grant. Let me read it. Unless this House keeps its financial procedure regular, taxes will grow and grow. This is the time to check wasteful expenditure. The way to lead to wasteful expenditure is irregularity; is having surpluses, and then Cabinet Ministers cadging from one another as to where the surplus shall go. Here it is: First Edward VII., chap. 21, p 23:—
  "For Grant-in-Aid of the expenses of the British Protectorates in Uganda and
  1718
  Central East Africa and under the Uganda Railway Act, £535,000."
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Read the next line.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY:
  "For sundry Colonial services, including certain Grants-in-Aid."
  Is that your precedent? Is that the way the House of Commons was deceived? The next is for a Grant-in-Aid of the revenues of Cyprus. I really do not think, when you are dealing with half a million of money, it ought to be a case of blind man's buff or hide and seek. When you are giving money away the public should know it is being given away. You should give it in the way of a Statute, as you did last year. It is not merely that your £80,000 has become £580,000, or that you withdraw the amount from the control of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. This is what you state:—
  "These sums will be advanced by way of loan to the Governments of the British East Africa Protectorate and Uganda, and will be repaid with interest at the rate of 3½ per cent, per annum."
  After all, a precedent should be a precedent. You refer me to the year 1891 for a precedent equivalent to that. I say, there is no precedent. The right hon. Gentleman, if he likes I presume, could, while I am on my legs, refer me to the part of the Statute which he says contains a corresponding proposal. I maintain the only chance this House has when these moneys are being given away in this lavish fashion is to insist on regular procedure. We are refused by the Colonial Office any single scrap of paper to show when the right hon. Gentleman made his estimate or when the amount was withdrawn from the Comptroller and Auditor-General's office. I know in these cases one's voice is only "a voice crying in the wilderness." The general body of the House is only too delighted to get money voted for these Colonies. They always forget their constituents have to pay for them. I suppose we shall have a single tax to pay for this. It is only by calling the attention of the public to the way moneys are voted, that anything like adequate public opinion can be stirred. The right hon. Gentleman said the Home Secretary the other night dealt with the point as to why this was done by estimate. The Home Secretary, I respectfully say, gave no answer on the point. The answer which the right hon. Gentleman suggests is the very reason against this being done. He says the Home Secretary said they were unable

  1719
  to proceed by the Finance Bill, because at that time the Government had not made up its mind. That is the very reason why Parliament should not give the Government money. They should not give the Government money until the Government has made up its mind. You have no business to come to the House for money until you have made up your mind.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I did not say the Government had not made up its mind. I said there were unforeseen contingencies, which made it impossible at that time to arrive at the actual figures.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: I do not know what is the unforeseen contingency; the contingency ought to have been foreseen. Undoubtedly, when you began, you only intended to demand £80,000. I maintain the entire course of procedure with regard to this thing is wrong. The right hon. Gentleman thinks, if you have in mind a stump on which you can graft a proposal, that regularises it. In other words, he thinks if you have a proposal of £80,000 for Colonial services you can make it £8,000,000 in a Supplemental Estimate. I deny that altogether. Could you, if you had a Vote of say £1,000,000 for England, Scotland, or Ireland, add £999,000,000 on to it, and say you have got the stump on which to make the Grant? That is the position of the right hon. Gentleman. Because there was in the Estimates an item of £80,000 he thinks you can by a jump make it £580,000. We are going, said the right hon. Gentleman, to provide a new steamer on Victoria Lake. How can that come under the head of a Supplemental Estimated? That is a new charge. Let me give the Government a shorter plan. Instead of having all these Estimates, let them put down some day "British Empire 5s.," and then have a Supplemental Estimate £150,000,000, and put that down on the night of the guillotine.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I did expect the right hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary to the Treasury would answer the hon. and learned Gentleman. He thinks discretion is the better part of valour, and that is the reason he remains silent.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Every word the hon. and learned Gentleman has said he said in his first speech, and every word I answered in the reply I made to the best of my ability. I could go at great length
  1720
  into the precedent he has challenged, and show him how entirely wrong he is on that point, but I do not think it worth while taking up the time of the Committee.

  Class 2.—BOARD OF TRADE.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  2. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £3,750, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade and Subordinate Departments."
  Sir F. BANBURYmoved that the Vote be reduced by £500.
  I should like to have some explanation with regard to this Vote. First of all, I should like to know how much of this money has already been spent, and then I should also like to know why it is we have this Vote at all. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that in the Act no provision is made for the expenditure of money, and I should like to know how it is that the expenditure of money which was not contemplated when the Act was passed has arisen. It is evident when the Act was passed the contemplation of the Government was that the expenses of the arbitration should be paid by the losing party, or at any rate be divided between the two-parties to the arbitration. For some unknown reason that has been departed from, and now apparently the country are asked to pay the expenses of an arbitration between individuals in a particular trade. It must be evident to the House the proper people to pay these expenses are the people who benefit from the arbitration, and the people who benefit from, the arbitration are the coal owners and trade unions. I see no reason why in a case of plaintiff and defendant the State should pay all the expenses arising under the Act. I do not know whether originally it was contemplated that the arbitrators might undertake this work without any fee at all. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will inform me what fees are paid to the arbitrators themselves and how this amount has been made up. This Vote is of the same unsatisfactory kind as that to which the hon. and learned Gentleman was just now alluding. The Government did not even propose to take a Supplementary Estimate for it at all; they proposed to use the surplus of one item in the Vote.

  1721
  When it was pointed out that was a most illegal thing to do, they presented this Supplementary Estimate. The amount does not matter; it is the principle. It seems to me two principles are involved. First of all, there should have been in the Act itself a Clause authorising this expenditure, so that when we were discussing the Act we should have known what we were doing. As it is, we have passed the Act, and this Supplementary Estimate is brought forward when the Act is in operation. That is my first objection. My second objection is that the taxpayer ought not to pay the expenses at all; they ought to be paid by the parties concerned in the dispute.
  Mr. JOHN WARD: I am sure that whatever we may decide with reference to the Vote now before the Committee the observations of the hon. Baronet, the Member for the City of London, as to the way in which it should be charged will not be accepted by anyone in any quarter of the House. It will be generally admitted that this Act which has made this expense necessary was not asked for by the miners of the country. It was passed in an emergency with a view to settling a great labour dispute, and the whole of the miners' representatives in the House, for one reason or another, voted against it. Therefore, to suggest that the cost of administering an Act of Parliament which was forced on one side for the convenience of the State should be charged to that one side is entirely unjustifiable. I wonder if it would be possible for the Board of Trade, in submitting an Estimate of this description, to give the Committee some idea as to how this Act has worked. I do not know whether it is possible to do that on a Supplementary Estimate. This is put down as a new service. I am not competent to decide the matter, and I will therefore proceed until I am called to order, and then I shall know exactly what the situation is. I again ask, is it not possible for the representative of the Board of Trade to give us some idea how this expense of £3,700 has been incurred, what arbitrations it refers to, and whether the arbitrations have been satisfactory. It seems to me, considering what an innovation in industrial life the Minimum Wage Act was, and in view of the fact that this is the first time on which we have a chance of discussing it, some indication ought to be given to the Committee by the representative of the Department concerned of how the Department views
  1722
  the working of the Act. Had it not been for the intervention of the hon. Baronet opposite, this Vote might have been passed without any discussion at all, and it is significant bearing in mind the controversy which the Act aroused, not only in this House but in the country, at the time it was passed, that we should now appear to have forgotten all about it, and should tacitly accept this provision without a word of explanation. Surely we ought to be told whether the Act has been a success or a failure. Bearing in mind the fact that the Government are making inquiry at the present time as to whether the principle of the Act should not be still further extended, one would have thought we should not have had an Estimate merely presented, and the Vote taken without any discussion; but, in view of the enormous innovation the Act has proved to be, and in view of the fact that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade himself in writing on philosophic and economic subjects—
  The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is not entitled to discuss the merits of the Act. He can only discuss its administration so far as it is covered by the Vote.
  Lord ROBERT CECIL: Is it possible to discuss whether the Act in its working has been a success or a failure? This does not stand in the position of a Supplementary Estimate. It is a new Estimate for a new service, and I submit that the whole policy of the payment of the money is open to discussion.
  The CHAIRMAN: I was not treating it as a Supplementary Estimate at all. The Act has been passed, and this is not the time to argue whether it is a good or a bad one. It is perfectly in order to ask about its administration, as far as money is required.
  Mr. JOHN WARD: I am delighted that I got over the border line and transgressed the rules of the Chair, for it has enabled me to ascertain that the object I have in view can be secured within the ruling now given. I want to find out what the Department thinks of this innovation in our industrial life. When we consider we have just recently had foreshadowed the possibility of an extension of similar legislation, naturally one would like to know how the Department views the working of the Act at the present time. There is not the

  1723
  slightest doubt that at the time of the passing of the Act the country was taken entirely unawares. It acted in an emergency, and it would be most interesting to many of us to learn how the Act has operated.
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. J. M. Robertson): I do not know how far I can within the rules of order, satisfy the hon. Member for Stoke, who wants to know the opinion of the Department on the working of this Act. But I think I shall be within the confines of order if I state that the Department holds that in general it has given satisfaction. I do not think I can be allowed to state anything beyond that. This Vote is for the payment of fees and out-of-pocket expenses of the various gentlemen who have been acting on the Boards. The President of the Board of Trade, in reply to a question some time ago, expressed his opinion that the charges here incurred ought to fall upon the nation, and, if I recollect rightly, the Prime Minister outside this House gave voice to a similar view. The hon. Baronet opposite argued that the cost of a service of this sort should be charged on those who benefit by it. I suppose he means that in the cases where the award is supposed to be substantially to the benefit of the men, the men ought to pay the costs; and where it is substantially in favour of the masters, the masters should pay.
  Sir F. BANBURY: Whoever was in the wrong should pay the costs.
  Mr. ROBERTSON: It is totally impossible to settle who are the gainers in regard to many of the awards. The question is whether both sides are not the gainers.
  Sir F. BANBURY: Then they should divide the cost.
  Mr. ROBERTSON: This Act was passed in order to secure the closing of a great national strike, and the cost of it ought therefore to be a national charge. The hon. Baronet asked a question as to the fees paid.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I asked how much had already been spent.
  Mr. ROBERTSON: I cannot give the exact sum at the moment. Certain cases have not yet been cleared up. Some
  1724
  awards have not been completed and the payments have not been made. Of course, the payments vary in the different cases according to the number of days on which the Chairmen were employed.
  Sir F. BANBURY: How much has been spent up to date?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: I can only say that the bulk has been spent. I have not the figures here, but I can get them.
  Sir F. BANBURY: Then it has been, spent without the authority of Parliament.
  Mr. ROBERTSON: That is a question of technique which I am not going into now. I am simply explaining, on behalf of the Department, how the money has been or is to be spent, and I have pointed out that the expenditure naturally varies in different cases. In two cases the award of the Chairman was not required. In some cases the investigation was quite short, and an agreement was quickly arrived at. In other cases the proceedings were protracted over a certain number of days; but I repeat that the bulk of the money has been spent. There is a little more to be spent in the way of providing for the interpretation of the awards, but I think these details should satisfy the hon. Baronet. If, however, he desires further information in regard to any particular case, I have no doubt it can be procured.
  Lord ROBERT CECIL: I do not think I ever listened to a more astonishing pronouncement than that we have just heard. Here is a Minister who comes down and says, "We have been spending a lot of money—I do not know how much—without any authority from Parliament at all, and we do not propose to ask for any indemnity or to put ourselves right: we only propose to ask the House of Commons to pass an Estimate which will give us power to spend money we have already spent." He stood there between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary to the Treasury. I thought I should have seen one of those right hon. Gentlemen faint; but apparently they regard the matter as of no importance. I do not believe the present Government regards the control of the House of Commons as of the slightest importance. Having committed a grave breach of the law, the Minister replies, when it is pointed out to him, "I am not going into the technique of the matter. I

  1725
  am merely here to say"—well, I do not know what he was here to say. All he did tell us was that they had not quite spent all the money, but that there was some more to be spent on some rather obscure question connected with the arbitrations. We and this Committee, at this time of day, should make some protest against action of that kind. I do not know what will ultimately happen to the hon. Gentleman. I suppose the Comptroller and Auditor-General will surcharge him, at any rate I hope so. There are still some Courts of Law which can exercise control over the Ministry of the day, and I hope they will in this case. A few centuries ago the hon. Gentleman would probably have been impeached. I hope we shall have some explanation from the financial Members of this Administration as to what has been the cause of and the defence for this extraordinary action.
  That is not the only matter. I seldom have the honour of agreeing with the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. John Ward), but I do on this occasion. He asked for some account of the working of this Act, what had been done in the arbitrations, and whether they fulfilled expectations and have met with approval. Not a word of answer has been given by the Minister himself. He said he thought that the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) only wanted to ask some question, and he did not think it was worth while to answer the hon. Member for Stoke. That is really treating the Committee with the grossest disrespect. The hon. Member, as a Minister, is here to answer to the Committee for the Department he represents. This is a very serious matter. The hon. Member for Stoke was quite right in saying that the Act set up an entirely new precedent—the establishment of what is called a minimum wage by Act of Parliament. The other day the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in an interesting speech, foreshadowed a very grave extension of that principle—something in the nature of compulsory arbitration. What exactly it was we do not know, because when we questioned the Prime Minister he said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had spoken in much more general terms. That was quite true, but it did not help us to know what the proposal was. When we ask what has been the result of the first preliminary experiment we get no reply at all.
  I read a very interesting article the other day by a Gentleman of very great influence, particularly in South Wales—Mr.
  1726
  Victor Hartshorn. I do not know what influence he still possesses, but he was at one time a man of great influence. He says that the Act has been a complete failure; that it has failed to fulfil the expectations of those who supported it; that, so far from securing a minimum of 5s., it has secured a minimum of far less; that the arbitrators have not proceeded on the principle which was foreshadowed in the Bill, and that they have not established what was the minimum wage that the men might fairly expect to gain, having regard to the standard of comfort which prevails; but have proceeded—no doubt quite rightly—on a different principle, which has produced a result he did not at all foresee, and which he says must lead to grave controversies in the future. I think that he added, in so many words, that it must lead to a national strike on a far larger scale and of a much more determined character than that which troubled the whole community earlier in the year. All these things are very serious. We ought to have a detailed exposition of what has been done under the Act, and of how far it has met with approval, and we ought to be put in a position to decide whether what was an experiment should be carried further, or whether it is one of those failures which we should wipe off the slate of legislation as soon as we can. We are still in Committee, and the hon. Gentleman can speak again. I suppose the President of the Board of Trade can, if necessary, be secured from some retreat, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer is present. He says that the Government are in the immediate future going to deal with the whole subject. No doubt they have observed the working of this Act, and he can tell us what has happened under it. I invite the hon. or right hon. Gentleman to do so, and to explain how it is that the money has been spent without the authority of this House.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The Noble Lord has invited us to enter on a very wide field of discussion with regard to the administration of this Act. He complains that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade did not respond to the invitation which was given by the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. J. Ward) to enter into it at great length and deal with its administration; its results generally; what the effect would be upon legislation of the same character, and upon the settlement of disputes of a kindred character. But the Noble Lord is not aware that this Vote

  1727
  was put down upon the distinct understanding that it was purely to raise a technical point, with which I will deal presently. I certainly objected to the arrangement on the ground that I understood that the question of the Insurance Act was coming on, and that hon. Gentlemen opposite were anxious to discuss it. I was told that this Vote would only take ten minutes, and that the only point which would be raised by the Opposition was a purely technical one. If we had received any information that there was a desire to raise the whole question of the administration—
  Lord ROBERT CECIL: I did not raise the question. The question was raised by the hon. Member for Stoke. I simply complained that no answer had been given to the hon. Member.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am only dealing with the point of the Noble Lord that we are not prepared to enter into the question of the whole administration of the Minimum Wage Act. If we had known that it was desired to discuss the whole administration, my hon. Friend would have been better equipped for the purpose than he is now. It is now only 7.30. I am not complaining of the question put, but when the hon. Member for Stoke raises questions between a quarter past and half past seven it is difficult to get all the facts. This Vote was put down in order to raise a technical question. I think the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbuary) will bear me out in that. I was assured it would only take ten minutes. That was the reason why my hon. Friend is not better equipped to answer the whole of the questions put by my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke. It would involve giving figures as to awards in each particular district, as to the effect upon the various demands put forward by the miners, the 5s., the 2s., the minimum wage, and the schedules. All that involves a considerable array of figures, and if my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary had had the slightest idea, or had received any warning from any part of the Committee, that questions of that kind would be asked, we should have known, and the arrangements entered into would perhaps have been entered into in a different spirit and in a different way. On the technical point we did receive notice that it was the intention of the hon. Baronet to raise the question. I will tell
  1728
  the Committee quite frankly what the position is. The Treasury were advised that the Board of Trade could pay this sum under the general heading of their Votes. The general heading is:—
  "Estimate of the amount required for the year ending 31st March, 1913, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade and Subordinate Departments."
  They were advised that under that general heading, if there were any savings in the Board of Trade Department, they were entitled to use those savings for the purpose of paying these umpires. That is still their view. Then we were pressed—I think by the hon. Baronet especially, I am not sure whether there were others—to put this Vote down as a separate Estimate, and the Treasury decided to do so. They have not altered their opinion, and they have had no ruling from anyone that makes it necessary to do so; but in deference to the wishes expressed by the hon. Baronet and his friends they have put it down as a separate item. They still think that the money could be paid under Vote 8. They have paid the money under Vote 8, and they think they are entitled to pay it under Vote 8, and until the Public Accounts Committee come to a different conclusion they will still hold that view. They will still press that view before the Public Accounts Committee, but they have put it down here because it was desired to discuss the matter. We were informed that there was no desire to debate this question, that it was only desired to raise a technical point, and that the whole matter would not take more than ten minutes. I assure the Noble Lord that the Treasury would not spend money which Parliament had not voted. They were under the impression, and are still under the impression, that they are entitled to spend the money out of the Board of Trade savings. They will contend that before the Public Accounts Committee. If the Public Accounts Committee take the Noble Lord's view, then the Treasury will be in the wrong, but that is their view.
  Mr. BONAR LAW: I only wish to deal with the excuse the right hon. Gentleman has just given for the spending of public money without any authority from Parliament. What is it he says? He says that they were advised—I do not know by whom—that any savings under the Board of Trade Vote could be used in other services by the Board of Trade. Does he not see that that means that the Government could, if they chose, undertake any new

  1729
  expense—this is a new expense—and, provided there were some savings in the Department, which incurred that expense, there is no need to come to the House of Commons at all. That is the whole case that we put before the Committee. To contend that until somebody points out to the Treasury that two and two make four they are entitled to say they make five, seems to me a very unreasonable contention.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: It is nothing of the kind. It is expenditure purely of a kind they have been incurring for years; which was incurred even during the years when the right hon. Gentleman was in the position of Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade. They are constantly paying sums of money—they were while I was there, and I believe while the right hon. Gentleman was there—to arbitrators and others to settle disputes. The mere fact that there was a special Act of Parliament dealing with the miners was not a disabling Act. It did not deprive them of the power vested in them already.
  Mr. BONAR LAW: Surely there were some statutory powers which authorised those payments when I was at the Board of Trade?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Certainly, and it is under that statutory power that we are incurring this expenditure. I have looked the matter up this afternoon. Almost the last Section of the Act of 1896 specifically authorises them to spend public money for the purposes of that Act. Under that Act they are entitled to spend public money for umpires and arbitrators in settlement of trade disputes. It is perfectly true that the Coal Mines (Minimum Wage) Act laid down principles with regard to the settlement of disputes in mines, but that was not a disabling Act. It did not deprive the Board of Trade of powers they already had; it only gave them additional powers. Under that Act they are entitled to spend money upon arbitrators for any trade dispute; they are entitled to spend it, and they have been spending it. The right hon. Gentleman himself spent money for this purpose. They are entitled to spend money in bringing any industrial disputes to a settlement. They have done so, and we shall contend that when we come before the Public Accounts Committee. That is our contention, that the Minimum Wage Act is not a disabling Act and does not deprive
  1730
  us of power which we already have, but gives us additional powers.
  Mr. BONAR LAW: It is perfectly true that money was spent by the Board of Trade for the purpose the right hon. Gentleman names, but it was spent in accordance with direct statutory power given by the Act of 1896 in connection with that Act. The right hon. Gentleman does not contend that what has been done now could have been done under the Act of 1896. It could only have been done under this new Act. There was, therefore, no power given to spend a penny by the previous Act, and the Government had no right to spend a single penny without getting from this House a Resolution authorising them to do so.
  Mr. WALSH: I have been listening this afternoon to a good deal of discussion on financial purity, and we have had cheers from most unexpected quarters. Financial purity is all right if the purists will agree amongst themselves. The hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury), however, disagrees entirely with the Noble Lord (Lord Robert Cecil). The Noble Lord says, "This will be all right if you provide for it properly"; but the hon. Baronet says, "No, this ought not to be provided out of public funds; it ought to be put on the employers and workmen alike."
  Sir F. BANBURY: What I said was that there are two points. One is the point I have been raising and fighting for a considerable time, that the money had not been properly spent; the other is as to whether or not the State should provide this money or the parties to the dispute. The two things are totally different.
  Mr. WALSH: It does not in any way go against the statement I have already made that the hon. Baronet distinctly stated that this particular expenditure ought to have been saddled upon the two parties to the dispute. I am quite sure the hon. Baronet is so fair-minded that if he knew what the Act contained he would not have used that argument. First of all, the Board of Trade is given compulsory powers of appointing these independent chairmen at the very beginning. If the two sides did not come together, the Board of Trade was given power by this House not only to appoint the Board, but to appoint the chairman, and compulsion had to be exercised within a definite period and a very short period—not more than five weeks—

  1731
  and so, as a matter of fact, we have this House agreeing by a very large majority, first of all that the Board of Trade shall have compulsory powers to compel people to administer an Act which they have never asked for, but have had thrust upon them; and secondly, giving them powers to appoint compulsorily a chairman whom the working people are to be called upon to pay.
  Sir F. BANBURY: In the Act, which the hon. Member says was passed by a large majority, there was no power of payment at all.
  Mr. WALSH: I am speaking now of the fact of compulsion. Chairmen are to be compulsorily appointed by the Board of Trade, whom the workmen do not want, to administer an Act for which they have never asked and then the whole cost is to be saddled upon the workmen and the employers. I have been with the hon. Baronet often in Committees, and I know his general fairness is such that if he had been aware of that fact he would not have spoken in the way he had. I am not going to speak on the point as to whether the money ought or ought not to have been voted, but there is one little point about which we are entitled to complain. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Robertson) remarked that from the information received by his Department the administration has given general satisfaction. That is a very nice phrase; it sounds very well and like the blessed word "Mesopotamia" is very soothing. I wonder where the hon. Gentleman obtains his information. Only this very day there is power given to a very large body of miners in Nottinghamshire to hand in their notices. I think the notices will probably number more than a thousand. There has been intense dissatisfaction in Northumberland and Durham. That there is widespread dissatisfaction in South Wales, everyone knows. That many of the pits in Staffordshire have been stopped, every person who knows anything about the administration is perfectly aware, and how anyone speaking on behalf of a Department such as the Board of Trade can say that the Act is giving general satisfaction, I cannot possibly imagine. It is not giving general satisfaction; it is giving general dissatisfaction. When this Vote is put down, a Vote having reference to the payment of officials appointed to administer one of the most important Acts that ever has been
  1732
  passed, it is not quite fair to these benches to make an arrangement with people on the other side that ten minutes shall see the whole thing through.
  Lord BALCARRES: The right hon. Gentleman was quite correct in saying I assured the Patronage Secretary that, so far as I knew, hon. Members on this side of the House meant to deal with the technical and financial question; but he is mistaken in thinking I gave any guarantee that my hon. Friend (Sir F. Banbury) would confine his remarks to ten minutes.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I objected to this being interposed between the two Votes, and my hon. Friend had some conversation with the Noble Lord, and I was told it would only take ten minutes. If the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) undertook that, he has kept well within his promise, as he always does.
  Mr. WALSH: I do not complain at all about the length of the speech or about the multiplicity of the speeches. What we have a right to complain about is that when a Vote of this character is put down there shall be an arrangement made between the two sides that about ten minutes will see the whole thing through. There was not a single word of consultation with the people here, and the whole matter is really looked upon rather as a party matter, and that the people who are specially interested, who are dealing with the matter every day of their lives, and who have to pay a big debt of responsibility to hundreds of people outside, should not be given the honour of a minute's consultation. That is the point I am trying to urge, and that is absolutely inequitable.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I do not want the hon. Member to run away with the idea that we were trying to shirk discussion. If he and those with whom he is associated had shown the slightest disposition or anxiety to debate the working of the Act most certainly time would have been found, and even now we will find time on the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill, but we received no intimation from any quarter. My hon. Friend, who was under the impression that there would only be a Debate on the technical point, is now faced with a Debate upon the working of the Act, and naturally at this stage he is not prepared for it. If there is a desire to debate the working of the Act the hon. Member and those associated with

  1733
  him are entitled to an opportunity. It is an important Act, affecting hundreds of thousands of people directly and millions indirectly, and it is a great experiment. An opportunity will be given, if there is a general desire, on Thursday, when we shall be prepared to answer questions.
  Mr. WALSH: I was not imputing conscious unfairness, but I was saying it seemed to me that only two sides, the old orthodox parties, are ever to be taken into consultation. This is really an important matter, which wants the most open and full discussion, because we are all of us desirous of saving the nation from a similar experience to that through which it passed some few months ago, and it is only by having the fullest publicity thrown upon the working of the Act that such a calamity can be prevented. We thank the right hon. Gentleman for the offer he has made, and we will fully utilise it.
  Colonel WILLIAMS: I will not anticipate the verdict of the Public Accounts Committee on the case presented to it, but I would remind the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the Act is not one for the settlement of disputes at all; it is an Act to fix a minimum wage, and whether a dispute is raised or not is entirely beside the point. The Act itself was brought into force within a few weeks after it was passed. I think the right hon. Gentleman said the Treasury state that they have a right to apply savings up till 31st March, 1912, for the payment of these arbitrators.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: 1913.
  Colonel WILLIAMS: You will not know until March, 1913, whether there are any large savings or not. I very much doubt whether the Treasury has power to earmark any savings, and there may be many legitimate things which will leave nothing at all for this. I think on both points the Chancellor's speech is an excuse and no reason.
  8.0 P.M.
  Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I do not know which of the two speechs was the more remarkable, that of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Robertson) or that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Whatever may be the arrangements under which a Vote is put down, when a Vote is put down on the Paper and is going to be moved, it is perfectly obvious that there is an opportunity for any Member in any quarter of the House to raise the whole administra-
  1734
  tion of the Vote. When the Financial Secretary to the Treasury puts down his name opposite a Motion on the Paper, he knows that the Committee has an opportunity of raising the whole subject. After all, you are asking this Committee, on the last day on which it can grant money, to grant to His Majesty a certain sum, and you ought to be able to say why you want to grant it. With regard to the technical point on which the right hon. Gentleman says he has notice, I do not think that even with that notice he has contrived to make a very good case. His answer is simply this: "It is quite true that Parliament has not given us leave to spend £3,750, but in spite of that we have spent a considerable amount of that sum." What is the excuse? The right hon. Gentleman says, "Oh, that is going to be paid for out of savings under Vote 8." I ask the Committee to note that there are no savings under Vote 8. There may be anticipated savings, but, if there are, I suppose the right hon. Gentleman has considered the matter, and is able to state under which head of Vote 8 he anticipates that these savings are going to occur. I presume he knows the amount under some particular head. Let the Committee notice what is proposed. This is for expenditure which has never been sanctioned—expenditure not on the existing services, but on a new service, which is to be paid for out of savings not realised, and which may never be realised, but which the Department think is going to be realised before 31st March next year. That is a new and preposterous doctrine. The suggestion is that it is warranted by something which was done under the Act of 1896. That is so remote from the fact as to be almost absurd. The Minimum Wage Act, under which this expenditure is to be incurred, contains no Clause which has any reference to expenditure which may be incurred. The right hon. Gentleman compared the Minimum Wage Act of this year with the Act of 1896. He said that these are both Acts to settle disputes, and that my right hon. Friend when at the head of the Department did use savings for the purposes of the 1896 Act. What is the difference between the two Acts? The last Clause of the 1896 Act says:—
  "The expenses incurred by the Board of Trade in the execution of this Act shall be defrayed out of moneys provided by Parliament."

  1735
  Where is the parallel Clause in the Minimum Wage Act1? The only excuse which the right hon. Gentleman, after full notice, has been able to bring forward breaks down the moment it is examined. This being the last day of Supply, I suppose it is impossible to move to report Progress, and I confess that I consider it very unfortunate under the circumstances. Had it been possible to do so, I should have been ready to take that course. It is treating the House of Commons with the grossest levity for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to come forward and make the excuse he has made.
  Mr. W. E. HARVEY: The hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) suggested that the costs incurred under the Minimum Wage Act should be borne by the men on these Boards. I would point out that neither the employers nor the workmen asked for the Act. We never came to the House, or approached any Minister, or asked for any favour. The Minimum Wage Act was forced upon us. To suggest then that the men who have had this Act forced upon them should pay for the cost of working it, as the hon. Baronet has done is, I think, a little bit hard.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I asked the question why suitors under the Act should not pay the amount of money incurred for costs, just as suitors have to pay in other Courts. I rather agree that as compulsion is brought into the matter there is something to be said for the statement the hon. Member has made. With regard to the other point, it is so serious that I shall divide the Committee upon it.
  Mr. W. E. HARVEY: As to the working of the Act, to go into it thoroughly would take a very long time. Take my own county (Derbyshire) by way of illustration. For fifteen whole days a committee consisting of twenty-four members—twelve on each side—was engaged going through applications under the Minimum Wage Act. I have the judge's award in my hand. I suppose there would be twenty mining districts. There would be twenty awards differing considerably, just as wages differed previous to the Board being created. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for the Ince Division (Mr. Walsh) with regard to the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade. I think he was not
  1736
  sufficiently informed when he made that statement to the House. I think it is a long way off being correct, because in every district where you have a Minimum Wage Board the men are not altogether so dissatisfied with the award as they are dissatisfied with the way the employers are ignoring the award. In the Minimum Wage Act it is clearly stated that the wage under the award should be paid from the day a strike ceases, or from the day work commences. But there are hundreds of employers who are ignoring it. The employers of this country are as much responsible for the unrest which exists today among the miners—more responsible, if I may say so—as anybody else. There is nothing which would give us greater pleasure on this side of the House and the men connected with this industry, than to give information to the House with regard to the establishment of the Boards and how the Act is working. We would try to put on the proper shoulders the responsibility for the unrest and dissatisfaction prevailing at the present time. I trust that will be gone into thoroughly in this House, so as to prevent a repetition of what has taken place this year by a general stoppage. The men are not going to be put off with Acts of Parliament if Acts of Parliament do not mean fair wages and agreements being honourably carried out. You cannot fool the men today. They say, "We are going to have a minimum wage, and that there must be provided a fair means of existence." Unless you do that, you will have a repetition of what took place early this year.
  Mr. CASSEL: As a new Member, I speak with some diffidence on matters affecting procedure. I have never listened with more amazement to anything than to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, more particularly as it came from the right hon. Gentleman who is supposed to be the guardian of the finances of the country. What is the use of having Estimates at all, and what is the use of having an Appropriation Act if the principles which the Chancellor of the Exchequer advanced are to apply? We have passed certain items of expenditure under Vote 8, but, according to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the President of the Board of Trade can say, "I hope there will be some saving under one item or another in that Vote. I propose, instead of spending the money on the purpose for which it is voted, to spend it on

  1737
  a purpose which Parliament has never agreed should be paid for out of public funds." What is the use of a Committee of Supply or an Appropriation Act at all? It is quite true that this is merely a small amount of £3,750, but the principle would equally apply to a larger amount. No more unfair doctrine has ever been introduced into the House than that any Department should be able to say, "We anticipate a saving on the whole of our Vote, and therefore we are going to apply it to a new service to which Parliament has never given its sanction." The hon. Baronet says he is going to divide the Committee on this subject. I certainly would support the Motion for paying this
  expenditure out of public funds, because I think it is right that it should be so paid. But at the same time there is a question of principle involved which is of much greater importance, and I find it a matter of extreme difficulty to decide how I shall vote. If we vote against this Estimate, it might be said that we are voting against the money being paid out of public funds. I make the strongest protest I possibly can against this new doctrine.
  Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £3,250, be granted for the said Service."
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 112; Noes, 246.

  Division No. 167.]

  AYES.

  [8.13 P.m.

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Glazebrook, Capt. Philip K.

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Astor, Waldorf

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

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

  Baird, John Lawrence

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gretton, John

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Barrie, H. T.

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Rawson, Colonel Richard H.

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Henderson, Major H. (Abingdon)

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Bird, Alfred

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Rutherford, W. (Liverpool, W. Derby)

  Boscawen, Sir A. T. Griffith-

  Hickman, col. T. E.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Hills, J. W.

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Hill-Wood, S.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Smith, Harold Warrington

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Burn, Col. C. R.

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Stanier, Beville

  Butcher, John George

  Horner, A. L.

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Cautley, H. S.

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, N)

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Swift, Rigby

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North)

  Clyde, James Avon

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle)

  Touche, George Alexander

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

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

  Dixon, C. H.

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

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.)

  Duke, Henry Edward

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Fell, Arthur

  Malcolm, Ian

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Fleming, Valentine

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Newman, John R. P.

  F. Banbury and Lord Robert Cecil.

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Nield, Herbert

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Barton, William

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Acland, Francis Dyke

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

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

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Cameron, Robert

  Agnew, Sir George William

  Black, Arthur W.

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Boland, John Pius

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

  Alden, Percy

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Arnold, Sydney

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Clough, William

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Clynes, John A.

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Barnes, George N.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Cotton, William Francis

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Crooks, William

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Crumley, Patrick

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Cullinan, John

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Joyce, Michael

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs, Louth)

  Keating, Matthew

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

  Delany, William

  Kellaway, Frederick George

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

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Kelly, Edward

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Kilbride, Denis

  Radford, George Heynes

  Dillon, John

  King, Joseph

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S.Molton)

  Reddy, Michael

  Doris, William

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Duffy, William J.

  Lansbury, George

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid)

  Leach, Charles

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Lundon, Thomas

  Rowlands, James

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

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

  Falconer, James

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Farrell, James Patrick

  McGhee, Richard

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgoton)

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

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

  Ffrench, Peter

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Sheehy, David

  Flennes, Hon. Eustace Edward

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Fitzgibbon, John

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  France, G. A.

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Furness, Stephen

  Manfield, Harry

  Snowden, Philip

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd

  Meagher, Michael

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Glanville, Harold James

  Middlebrook, William

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Millar, James Duncan

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Molloy, Michael

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Mond, Sir Alfred M.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)

  Mooney, John J.

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Hackett, John

  Morgan, George Hay

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Hancock, J. G.

  Morison, Hector

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Hardie, J. Keir

  Muldoon, John

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Munro, Robert

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

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

  Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

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

  Nannetti, Joseph

  Webb, H.

  Harwood, George

  Needham, Christopher T.

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Neilson, Francis

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

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

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Nolan, Joseph

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Hayward, Evan

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Whyte, Alexander F.

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Wiles, Thomas

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Wilkie, Alexander

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

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

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

  Henry, Sir Charles

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

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

  O'Dowd, John

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Ogden, Fred

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Hinds, John

  O'Grady, James

  Winfrey, Richard

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

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

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Hodge, John

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Hogge, James Tynte

  O'Malley, William

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

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

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  O'Shee, James John

  Illingworth and Mr. Gulland.

  Original Question put, and agreed to.

  Class 8.—NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE COMMISSION (ENGLAND).
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  3. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £42,500, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for the
  1740
  Salaries and Expenses of the Insurance Commission (England), for Contributions under Part I. of the National Insurance Act, 1911, and for Grants-in-Aid of Expenditure incurred out of the National Health Insurance Fund in respect of Benefits and Expenses of Administration under that Part of that Act (including certain Special Grants towards the Expenses of Insurance Committees)."
  Mr. EDGAR JONES: On a point of Order. It might be for the convenience of the Committee if we could have a general discussion taking in the different countries concerned. If the discussion is confined to England it will be very difficult indeed to take one country at a time.
  The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Whitley): If the matter is put in a separate Vote, I am bound by the Vote. I cannot allow a discussion on Wales on an English Vote.
  Mr. EDGAR JONES: I assume that the Government is going to give us the general figures.
  The CHAIRMAN: The Government is responsible for the Vote.
  Mr. RUPERT GWYNNE:I beg to move to reduce the Vote by the sum of £100.
  Bearing in mind the vast interest taken throughout the country in the Insurance Act, and that the opportunities given us in this House of discussing administration have been so very meagre, and also that the additional sums required are so very large as compared with the original Estimates, the House will agree that it is somewhat unfortunate that the time left to us to discuss these Supplementary Estimates is so very short. A glance at the Supplementary Estimates will show that the additional sums required are very large in proportion to the original Estimates, and that those sums vary very much in the cases of England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. England seems to have underestimated the expense to a very much greater extent three months ago than the other countries, or else Scotland and Ireland were much more greedy in the claim they made at the time. At any rate, we see that the additional sum required for salaries, wages, and allowances amounts to over 50 per cent, of the original Estimate, whereas if we go to the Votes under the same head in Scotland we see a comparatively small sum, something like 15 per cent. instead of 50 per cent. Some reason might be given by the right hon. Gentleman as to this very large difference. My reason in moving to reduce this Vote by £100 is really to get some information from the Government as to how these Estimates were arrived at originally, and how these additional sums which are required have been arrived at. I think it is right that in this House we should watch very carefully the action of the
  1742
  Insurance Commissioners at the present time. It is the first opportunity we have had since the Act has come into operation of examining some of their work. I should like to know who is really responsible for these Estimates. Is the Treasury responsible for them? Or have the Insurance Commissioners gone through them step by step, and satisfied themselves as a body and individually that the amounts they are asking us to pay are fair amounts and will be required? I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that he told us to-day, in an answer to a supplementary question:—
  "I do not think the Commissioners ever do come actually to a vote."
  What do the Commissioners do? How do they conduct their business? Without coming to a vote? They must satisfy themselves in some way, and I assume that the Commissioners, like all human beings, do not agree on every subject: there must be some divergence of opinion. In that case how do they arrive at a decision? Is their mind made up for them by the right hon. Gentleman, or do they really make up their own minds? It is a point of the utmost importance, and one on which I should be glad if the Committee could be enlightened. It must be remembered that we are at the present time entering upon a system which is entirely new to English local government. Hitherto, if a Commission or Committee has been appointed, its first duty has been to put aside individual interests of its members and act as a whole, but, in this instance, each Commissioner is appointed directly to represent a separate interest. One represents friendly societies, another trade unions, another the doctors, another the Treasury, and so forth; so that really each Commissioner, in his office, has to look at the Act in a different light, and to interpret the Act as an advocate while he is at the same time a judge. That is quite foreign to our system in England hitherto. On any public body it has always been recognised that the man who is appointed to it should put aside any particular interest he may have had, and judge of the question at issue from a general standpoint; but in this Insurance Commission we have the members of it representing particular interests, and not only is that the case with regard to the Commission, but right away through every committee under the Act, the members of those committees each representing a

  1743
  certain interest. Therefore it is very important, and I do not think it is unreasonable, that we should ask how the decisions are arrived at in those circumstances. If a vote is not taken, are we to assume that they are entirely led by the chairman, or by the chairman of the Joint Commission, or by the Chancellor of the Exchequer? That is a question which I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not fail to answer later on. With regard to the Supplementary Estimates, it is interesting to note—the Commissioners having come, I suppose, to a unanimous decision—that a White Paper has been issued to the Insurance Committees in which they give some very good advice, and it is this:—
  "The Commissioners advise the Insurance Committees to proceed tentatively in the first instance, and with strict regard to economy."
  I should like to know whether the Commissioners have practised the advice they have preached, and, if so, why is it that these sums are required now? Why have the increases been so very large in the last three months? In the details, which I am bound to say are very scanty, we find that there is a sum of £18,000 for travelling expenses. I should like to know how that £18,000 is made up, because it is not, remember, £18,000 for one year, but it really means £18,000 for something like six months. I do not think, so far as we can see, that this is observing that strict regard for economy which the Insurance Committees are recommended to follow. The same remark applies to the other sum for administrative, legal, and general clerical staff, and for the medical and inspecting staff, now being appointed in accordance with the recommendations of the Departmental Committee. I would like to know whether these medical inspectors have already been appointed, and what are they to do when they have been appointed? So far I have not been able to find out whether there is at present any work of inspection for them to do. Some information on that point would be convenient when we discuss that item. Under Sub-head E, Weekly Contributions, we find:—
  "Contributions payable out of money provided by Parliament under Section 81 (10) of the Act, and in respect of low-waged contributor? (Section 4 (1)), persons over sixty-five years of age at the commencement of the Act (Section 48 (2)), and persons coming under the provisions under Sections 47 and 48 (2) of the Act."
  1744
  I would like some information in regard to persons over sixty-five years of age, because we are told now that persons who at the time of the passing of the Act were sixty-five and were employed persons are to become insured persons under the Act. What benefits are they going to receive, because, according to the Act, they are to have such benefits as their society may prescribe? I should be much obliged if the right hon. Gentleman would tell me, in the first instance, what benefits men over sixty-five years of age are to get who do not belong to an approved society? There are a great many people living in the Constituency which I represent who are sixty-five and over, and who have belonged all their lives to small village societies which have been killed by virtue of this Act, and these men are forced to become Post Office depositors. Although we have tried recently to find out what their position would be when called upon to pay this weekly tax, we have been quite unable so far to elicit any information on the subject.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: May I ask why Post Office contributors?
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: They cannot join approved societies, and they are forced to become deposit contributors.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Why cannot they join approved societies?
  Mr. GWYNNE: The reason why is that the approved societies will not take them. The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly well aware that there are hundreds and thousands of men who cannot get into approved societies.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Practically all the approved societies will take them.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that there are many men belonging to village clubs over sixty-five years of age whose health may not be sufficiently good to get them into an approved society. I can give the right hon. Gentleman the names, not of one or two, but of hundreds of men who have been unable to get admission into approved societies. If there were only ten or twenty of those persons what benefit are they going to get under the Act, although they are going to be taxed? I know that the right hon. Gentleman resents the word "taxed," but certainly in

  1745
  the case of men over sixty-five it is a tax and a very unfair tax. I ask him if he knows now what benefits those men are going to get? I find in a circular, A.S. 29, issued for official use by the Insurance Commissioners, a list of alternative benefits which it is suggested approved societies can give to men who are sixty-five and over. That does not meet my point as to men who do not belong to approved societies. In the list of benefits suggested for men over sixty-five who are fortunate enough to belong to approved societies we find that under this beneficent Act some of those men who are compelled to pay taxes in this way are to get as much as a pension of 1s. per annum. I do not like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether that is to be paid quarterly or monthly or weekly. Really, is it worth while to drag men into an Act unwillingly for the sake of telling them that they are going to get 9d. for 4d., and—
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I understand it is the desire of the hon. Member to discuss benefits, but we are now dealing with the Supplementary Estimate, and must confine ourselves to the rules of the Committee with regard to it. The only reason benefits comes in here is that £17,000 are credited to the English Fund which should have gone to the Welsh Fund. I desire to enter a caveat against the very wide discussion of the Act. We are entitled to deal with the administration of the Act, and not the general purposes of the Act.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: I submit I am quite in order, as the Insurance Commissioners offer alternative benefits.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: On the point of Order, I am only too anxious that we should deal with the administration of the Act in the fullest possible fashion. The hen. Gentleman, when I took exception to his remarks, was not touching the administration of the Act, but the Act itself. If we are going to discuss the Act, we will not have much time to discuss the administration.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: On the point of Order, the Commissioners have issued advice to the friendly societies as to the nature of the benefits which can be given, and stating that if the societies were to offer any other benefits than those which they have scheduled then they would have to get actuarial valuations.
  1746
  The right hon. Gentleman says it is the Act, but I submit that it is the administration of the Act by the Insurance Commissioners which is now called in question. My hon. Friend was referring to an actual circular issued to the Approved Societies for their information and guidance, and was commenting upon that administrative step taken by the Commissioners.
  Mr. PEEL: Does not the Grant-in-Aid and the expenditure of money in respect of benefits come in under expenses and administration of Approved Societies?
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: As I have already explained, the only reason that comes in is owing to an error by which a sum of £17,000 was credited to the English Fund which ought to have gone to the credit of the Welsh Fund, otherwise that would not come in the Estimate at all. I do not want to rule too absolutely strictly as that is no doubt the general feeling of the Committee, but as I understood the hon. Member, he was going into the Act in general and not the administration of the Act which is the question under the Supplementary Estimate.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: I do not want to transgress your ruling, but I do want, and do not conceal the fact, definitely to get out from the right hon. Gentleman what is the exact position of those men who are forced to contribute against their will and whose age is sixty-five and upwards? I think I am right in saying that a majority of hon. Members were under the impression that persons of sixty-five and upwards would not have to contribute under the Act, and, in fact, the Act itself says so. We have been told comparatively lately that a man who is not in employment at the time of the coming into operation of the Act, 15th July, but who becomes employed afterwards will not have to contribute, but a man who was in employment on the 15th July and whose age was sixty-five or upwards will be called on to contribute. That in itself is a somewhat confusing state of affairs. Although we have repeatedly pressed for an answer, we cannot find out what are the benefits for which those men are paying. The right hon. Gentleman rides off on the excuse that that will depend upon the particular society to which he belongs. I think it is unfortunate that this House should not have the opportunity of discussing what those benefits are.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I have listened very carefully to what the hon. Member has been saying, and I rule that it is outside the scope of the Estimate "we are now considering.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: Surely it is not outside the Estimate? I should have thought that the fact that either a deduction or increase was mentioned was material when it comes before the House. If it is not for discussion, then I do not know why it was put there. In Any case we can get it on the Scottish Vote. There are several items here which are new charges altogether. Thus we have law charges and incidental expenses, about which I should like some particulars. There is also a Grant of £11,500 for insurance committees. So far as I can gather that is a special Grant to those committees. How was the figure arrived at, and is the Grant to be continued for a number of years? For, although there may be heavy expenses thrown upon the committee in starting, yet I do not see how that expenditure is to be curtailed in future. I think the sum suggested for carrying on the clerical and other work of those committees is extremely inadequate. When you talk about a Grant not exceeding £100 or, in regard to a large county, being from £100 to £200, it cannot be said that that is an abnormal amount for carrying on the work of the committee. If that is going to be given, not for one year but six months, and then cut down straight away, we shall certainly have chaos in those offices when the time comes. I think we ought to be told quite clearly what is the policy of the Insurance Commissioners with regard to this Grant. Why do they expect the first six months to be much more expensive than the future? According to their own circular they suggest that at the beginning people will be ready to give for nothing help which they cannot be expected to continue. If this Grant is given for the first six months, is it intended in the future to give a Grant of £200 or more additional each year? No doubt the Commissioners had some grounds for coming to their conclusion as to what Grant they should give, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will give us some information on the subject.
  Mr. J. H. THOMAS: I welcome this opportunity of calling attention to the method by which the Commissioners have approved certain societies. I do not take
  1748
  up the line indicated by the hon. Member opposite that the Commissioners, because prior to their appointment they were particularly interested in certain sections of the friendly society movement, are incapable of dealing competently with these matters.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: I never said the Commissioners were incapable of being competent. I said they were appointed to represent certain interests.
  Mr. J. H. THOMAS: To my mind they were not appointed to represent certain interests. I presume that they were appointed because particular interests would be affected by the Act, and their special knowledge of those interests would be of value in the administration of the Act. If that were not the situation, the experience they have gained would be use less. Any Member appointed because of his special knowledge of friendly society work or of the doctors or of trade unions, need not necessarily be prejudiced in favour, of that particular industry, but he would be enabled by his long experience to see that the interests of the various societies were at any rate safeguarded. I have had a fairly good experience of the Act. My own society was one of the first to be approved, and it is one of the largest. I say that it is not true to suggest that any man of sixty-five years of age need become a deposit contributor. There are scores of societies to-day whose doors are open to them, and who are making efforts to get men of all ages. Again, to suggest that this Act has killed societies is not true. No one criticised the measure more than I did. I kept the House going one or two nights all night on Amendments which I proposed. But it is not true to say that the Act has killed trade unions or friendly societies. The experience of our own trade union is—
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That has to do with the effect of the Act, and not the administration as disclosed by this Estimate.
  Mr. J. H. THOMAS: I was tempted by the observations of the hon. Member opposite, and, unfortunately, I fell. One particular point to which I wish to call attention is the manner in which the insurance cards have been issued. Several trade unions, including our own, were partially approved; that is, subject to a conference of the society ratifying the rules, the society was approved. We

  1749
  urged the Commissioners to allow us to have the cards. It was pointed out that there would be a rush as the day for the Act to come into operation came nearer, but we were told that we could not have the cards until the society was finally approved. When the appointed day came every one was in a difficulty. A most remarkable thing was that a large number of employers' societies, which were not approved and are not approved to-day, were given thousands of cards, which were distributed indiscriminately. Therefore other societies were penalised, with the result that thousands of men have been driven into societies to which they never intended to belong, simply because the Commissioners did not enable the approved societies to have cards as they ought to have done.
  Mr. W. THORNE: Crewe got plenty.
  Mr. THOMAS: I am not complaining about any having obtained cards. What I say is that there ought not to have been preferential treatment. Some trade unions received scandalous treatment in their endeavours to get cards. Telephone messages, telegrams, and interviews produced no result. Further, I cannot understand the method by which the Commissioners approved certain societies. It was repeatedly stated when the Bill was passing through Committee that the intention of the measure was to give every man a free choice to join any society he liked. There was to be no compulsion on the part of the employer or anybody else to induce a man to join any particular society. Let us see how that has been given effect to. Take a railway society. Prior to the Act coming into operation it was a condition of service on the Great Western Railway that a man must belong to the society connected with that particular railway. The same thing applied to other railways, such as the Great Northern. The management committee of the Great Western Society decided to make one section of the society an approved society under the Act. They said, "We will not in future make it a condition of employment that you shall join this section, but we make it a condition of employment that you join the other society." The Commissioners approved the society, with the result that a man who was previously stopped 1s. 2d. per week for his contributions, because he has made another society his approved society is now stopped 1s. 6d., although he made full provision before. The Commis-
  1750
  sioners have approved a society which not only makes it a condition of employment, but also penalises men to the tune of 4d. per week. On the other hand, the reverse position is created by another railway society. The men connected with the Midland Railway Company said, "We want to continue as we were before, paying the same contribution for the same benefit, and we will pay the 4d. in addition." In that case the Midland Railway said—and they are approved by the Commissioners—"No; in order to have a special inducement that you should be attached to us, we will administer the benefits of the Act for 3d.; but unless you make us your approved society we will refuse to allow you to go on as in the past." I say that in these cases between employer and employés it is not fair dealing; it is indirect pressure, and it is contrary to the spirit and intention of the Act.
  But there is a clearer injustice. A man who was injured some months ago, and who has been receiving compensation for a few months, went last Friday, a week after the Act came into operation, in the ordinary way to draw his sick pay. He had received his compensation from his employers, the Midland Railway Company, and went for his sick pay to the Midland Railway Club, of which he is a member. The company said, "No, so far as we are concerned you did not make the Midland your approved society, and therefore you do not continue to have sick pay as heretofore. All this clearly proves that there is pressure. Here was a man who was injured prior to the Act. At least he should go on as if the Act were in operation; but, as I say, all these things clearly prove one of two things: either that these clubs are being sanctioned and approved contrary to the spirit and intention of the Act, or, if it is not so, then the intention, as set out by the Chancellor of the Exchequer is not being given effect to. I speak with a view of drawing attention to these particular anomalies, because, after all, anyone who has attempted to administer this Act cannot do other than appreciate the magnitude of the whole question. One has had only to attempt to deal with it even in a limited sense to realise what a gigantic task it was. I am not speaking critically in the sense that I feel the Commissioners have been negligent, but rather to draw attention to these anomalies which are prejudicing the men unnecessarily, and which are causing friction in the early stages of the Act that should not be

  1751
  caused. It is because, I believe, that in the end the Act will be beneficial that I am genuinely anxious to at least give every friendly society, every trade union, and every other society a fair, open chance to do its best under the Act that I think the Commissioners should realise that their duty is to hold no brief for any particular organisation, either employer or employé, trade union or friendly society, but to treat everyone on an equal footing and administer the Act in that spirit.
  9.0 P.M.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: I notice that a large item under this Vote is for salaries, wages, and allowances. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman opposite whether any of this sum is to be applied towards the remuneration of the Excise officers who are being asked by the Commissioners to give information and advice to persons in their districts who might desire it. We are told that the persons who require information should apply to their local Excise officer. In many districts, however, the Excise officer does not visit a particular village, it may be for a week or a fortnight at a time. In such cases it is very difficult for the persons living on the spot to obtain the information required. Assuming that they find the Excise officer, a very general experience is that with the duties that they have to carry out as old age pensions officers, combined with their various other duties, relating to the Excise, the officers really have not time to devote to the large number of applications received from almost every quarter. These applications are to a very large extent to the effect that the persons making them desire exemption altogether from the provisions of the National Insurance Act. I understand that something like 100,000 claims for exemption have been sent to the Excise officers. These they have been wholly unable to attend to, because they have not had the time to do so, if they are to carry out the other duties for which they are paid. I should like to ask whether any additional provision is being made for the remuneration of these officers, and whether any additional number of officers are being provided in order to carry out the duties which these gentlemen have not time to carry out?
  In the second place I want to refer shortly to the position of the small societies, and to the way in which the small societies are being treated,
  1752
  owing to the system of urging insured persons to join an approved society as soon as possible. The position of the small societies was discussed when the Insurance Bill was passing through this House. It was then pointed out that the way to save the small societies was for them to become associated under Section 37 of the Act. The system of association which was propounded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the House seems not to be favoured at the Commissioners' offices. During the last few weeks there has been sent out an extremely unintelligible and intricate circular to those who are interested in small societies, urging them to adopt one of three courses, which, if I remember aright, are described as, Centralisation, Affiliation, and Association. It is extremely difficult for a person well acquainted with the provisions of the Act, and one who has received a comparatively good education, to understand the intricacies of this circular, but it is wholly impossible for the officials of a small village society to understand it at all! The result has been absolute confusion in many districts, whereas before the issue of this circular there was a fair chance of carrying out association in a county federation or otherwise, for the purposes of the Act, as was originally intended, and as was suggested to this House.
  I think it was wrong at the eleventh hour, and shortly before 15th July, to issue a circular of this kind, which has tended to confuse so many minds. The confusion does not rest there, because in many districts—I think it is particularly so in the North of England—there have been agencies at work with a view of trying to persuade members of these small societies to join other and larger organisations. I am sure that the methods adopted are methods which the right hon. Gentleman will cordially disapprove of. I feel I can say that before I put the case. The agents of certain societies—and unless I am pressed I am not going to mention names—have during the last, few weeks been approaching not merely prospective insured persons, but their employers, in order to point out the supposed advantage of joining their particular societies; and they have not merely tried to influence the employer, but they have tried to bring pressure upon the workmen to leave their own small societies and join those particular large organisations;

  1753
  and they have gone so far as to make it worth the while of foremen and others in authority, by means of commission or otherwise, to induce their fellows to join these societies. The result is that these men are being drafted away in many cases from the smaller societies into the bigger organisations, and the employers are encouraging them to go. Many of these large societies are making it known that they intend, in the middle of October, to collect the contribution cards, and so save trouble to those concerned.
  The DEPUTY - CHAIRMAN (Mr. Maclean): I do not quite see the point that the hon. Member is putting or how it can be connected with the administration of the Act in regard to this Supplementary Vote.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: With all due respect, I assume that some of these salaries, wages, and allowances, of which there is an extraordinary increase in this Vote, are for the purpose of the National Insurance Office, and what I am seeking to criticise is the method of the National Insurance Health Commissioners in not putting a stop to this practice, and what I am about to suggest is that the time has arrived when in my opinion a circular ought to be issued to the employers informing them that it is no business of theirs to choose a society for their work people, and in the second place that intimation ought to be given in like manner to the working men making it perfectly clear that they will be no way prejudiced in their employment by joining any society that is likely to be approved. There is one other point to which I wish to draw attention, and that is to the poster which has been displayed during the last fortnight upon church doors and other public places to the effect that it is desirable that all employed contributors should take the earliest opportunity of joining an approved society because if they do not they will become deposit contributors and lose all the chief benefits of Health Insurance. What is the effect of that? We all know that the small societies have taken, and must take, a longer time to become approved than the large societies which are better staffed and better organised. Most of these small societies have not yet become approved. What is the result? Any employed contributor reading this notice at once says to himself, I shall lose the benefit
  1754
  of National Health Insurance unless I at once belong to one of these large societies which have become approved. I venture to say that this notice has done a large amount of harm to the small societies which the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury have professed so much their interest in. It is only with a view to drawing attention to these matters that I have risen at all, but I am bound to say that I think there is an enormous amount of confusion in the Commissioners' administration, and although I for one am doing all in my power to exhort law-abiding citizens to carry out the Act, whether they like it or not, I think it is hard that those interested in the village societies should have to meet with all the difficulties to which I have referred, and for which the Commissioners are, to a large extent, responsible.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The hon. Gentleman who moved the reduction of this Vote complained of the meagre opportunities that have been given for impeaching the administration of the Insurance Act. Hon. Members opposite have had six opportunities in six months of full Debate since the Act has been launched, but they have been reluctant to use these opportunities, and the only criticism I make of them is that the strength of the attacks by hon. Gentlemen opposite seems to lessen each time, and on each occasion they seem to show greater reluctance in bringing these matters before the House. And there is a singular discrepancy between the impeachment of the Act in this House and the impeachment of their administration of the Act when that impeachment is made in the country. On every opportunity we ask our critics to bring before this House and assize of public opinion something of the impeachment of the administration which is spoken of so freely in the country by hon. Gentlemen opposite. We know what is said in the dark cannot stand the survey of the light of day.
  Mr. PEEL: Is this in order?
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: No, I do not think it is in order.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Well, as there has been criticism of the administration of the Act, and as this is a Supplementary Estimate in connection with the administration of the Act, I think we have a perfect

  1755
  right to defend its administration. This is the only opportunity we get of defending its administration from impeachment made outside. We are told that there is chaos, confusion, absolute muddle. Every effort has been made to impeach the administration of the Act, and I have few-opportunities—except on occasions like this—to defend the Insurance Commissioners from statements of that kind. I am glad to exclude the hon. Member who has just sat down from any such futile attacks as have been made upon the Act outside. I shall try to deal with the points raised as effectively as I can. If you examine the criticisms of hon. Gentlemen opposite you will see that they are very far from the mark. This is a new service, a great Government Department, which will, I suppose, be one of the largest of all the Departments of the Government, dealing with the insurance of 14,000,000 of people in the country. It had to be very largely experimental, and we should be very much open to criticism if at the very beginning we were to ask in the first Estimate that large sums of money should be voted without being able to go into details or to give justification for these large sums. Everyone who understood what was going on recognised that as soon as the conditions were settled and the staff increased, and as soon as the Report of the Mowatt Committee had been given, a Supplementary Estimate would of necessity be required. When you consider what the Supplementary Estimates are in the recurring Estimates, and what they are in the initial expenditure, any fair-minded man must recognise what an extraordinarily small amount we are asking for to work such a gigantic scheme of social reform. The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Rupert Gwynne) made a statement for which he had no warrant when he stated that the Commission was formed to represent certain interests. Of course, it was formed for nothing of the kind. The Commissioners were appointed from all those who had special knowledge of the various classes of employment which were going to be gathered in under the general title of insured persons. They were appointed on account of their knowledge of the various interests affected and their special knowledge of the administration of the Act. If the hon. Member for East-bourne had been present at any single meeting of the Commissioners, he would
  1756
  have understood that there was no question of the representation of any particular interests; nor are their meetings carried out by a kind of wrangle between the Commissioners, ending in a vote, in which the majority votes down the minority. It is so far different from that wild picture that I cannot understand where the hon. Member got his information.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: I asked to be informed how the Commissioners arrived at their decision, and whether they voted or not.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: At any rate, the hon. Gentleman made an attack upon the Commissioners. The hon. Member for Derby (Mr. J. H. Thomas) asked me certain specific questions.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: Answer my question.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The hon. Member for Derby asked me questions of a more serious nature concerning the action of approved societies. I agree there has been from a very small number, not 1 per cent, of the general body of insured persons, certain complaints in connection with approved societies, but I do not think the hon. Member will find that in administration the Commissioners have gone outside the boundaries of the Act. It is true that the Act definitely laid down that no employers' society should make it a condition of employment that the men should belong to a particular society, but it was not laid down in the Act that no employers' society should offer special advantages to persuade men to join approved societies. He recognised that the great organised body which the hon. Member represents did offer counter advantages in order that the men should join approved societies. As to the criticisms made by the hon. Member for Wiltshire (Mr. C. Bathurst), his points always require serious and courteous answers. In the first place, the hon. Member asks whether there was any sum in the Estimates which we set down to remunerate the Excise officers for their special work. No such sum was set down in these Estimates. The Excise officers had been called upon to deal with special work, and in consideration of that special work they have been given certain special privileges. It is true that there has been a large addition to the staff of the Customs and Excise in order to cope with this particular work, and

  1757
  there has also been a larger number of promotions in the service. For reasons which the hon. Member opposite will understand, I do not wish to commit myself beyond that at the present time. The Excise officers are doing excellent work with the greatest energy and devotion and, of course, if on examination it is found that they have been subjected to a very large amount of overwork, that will have to be considered in the future. I cannot go beyond that statement at the present moment. The hon. Member further stated that he thought we had been unfair to the small societies, but I can assure him that if he had been a member of the Commission he would realise that if we had definitely decided to brush away the small societies, or even let the normal condition take its course and no effort made to save the small societies, the result would not have been so satisfactory.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: I do not wish to suggest that the Chairman or the Commission has been unfair to the small societies.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: We have appointed special officers to visit the country societies to facilitate their being approved individually or joined together as affiliated societies or associations. It seems probable that there will be a large number of these societies. Some of them have been already approved, and many of them are on the verge of being approved, and the whole effort of the Commission, as was acknowledged in another place, has been that none of these small societies should be destroyed, but all of them, in so far as they possessed any claim to be called insurance societies, should be woven up in the great fabric of national health insurance. He complains of our urging men and women to join approved societies; but I am quite sure the Commission are right in urging men and women not to delay in this matter. At the present moment no doubt there is very great competition to get insured persons to join approved societies, and all sorts of societies have engaged in that competition. The small and large friendly societies are competing for members, and without medical examination they enrol them as members, and so the prophecies as laid down in last October and November by hon. Gentlemen opposite have proved wrong in this respect. We were told every one who could not pass a medical examination would be squeezed out and would have to become deposit con-
  1758
  tributors, and even wilder suggestions were made.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I think the right hon. Gentleman is now trespassing upon matters which I have ruled out of order.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I am very sorry, but I assure you, Mr. Maclean, that I am doing my best to keep within your ruling. My argument is that the advice given is right, and not wrong, to urge men and women as soon as possible to get into approved societies. In a very few months' time it is exceedingly doubtful whether people will receive such liberal conditions, and it is doubtful if they become deposit contributors whether they will not have to go through some special test. If men join new approved societies, and afterwards find societies which specially meet their needs, they can apply for a transference, and that cannot be unreasonably withheld, and there will be no attempt to withhold it in the first few weeks of the operation of the Insurance Act. I am sure we are right in urging forward the importance of persons joining approved societies immediately. Then the hon. Gentleman said that confusion existed in the Insurance Office, though he said he would do his best to reduce that confusion. In all seriousness, I ask, "Where is the confusion that exists?" We had the most elaborate prophecies of it. We were told on the highest authority the whole of the administration had broken down, that the Commissioners were in despair, and that they wanted to throw up their job and were only kept in it by the indomitable fury of my right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. How remote that was from the actual facts I, who was spending many hours every day in connection with the administration of the Insurance Act, knew. You can never argue against prophecy. The only thing to do is to wait with what patience you have until events prove how foolish that prophecy is.
  I submit the results which have been seen in a fortnight only of the working of the Insurance Act have proved the folly of the prophecies which were so freely indulged in on the other side of the House. What is the actual state of affairs? I agree there might a priori have been ground at the beginning for prophesying confusion. The magnitude of the task set before the Commisisoners of introducing a system of insurance, which was a new

  1759
  system in this country, affecting three-quarters of the population to come into, and of dealing with over 13,000,000 people and with every variety of trade and industry in what I suppose is the most complex commercial society in the world, might have given ground for the belief that they would not be adequate for it. It would have been a difficult task if hon. Members had freely accepted the Acv and had freely helped the administration instead of putting every obstacle they could in the way of it. It would have been easier if we could have laid down an iron systematic State scheme, instead of doing what we have done and which the Commissioners have certainly succeeded in doing with a success beyond my expectation—sweeping into one universal system all the great approved societies that have had anything to do with insurance of any sort or kind. They have had to create a great Government Department operating in four countries, they have had to create a vast machinery of regulations and local administration, and they have had to deal with special cases such as out-workers or tuberculous sufferers, in respect of whom we have received assistance from some hon. Gentlemen opposite; and, from the first week I had to defend the administration, we were subjected in this House to the fiercest attack, not on the Act, but on the administration of the Act, The Commissioners were accused of corruption in their appointment; they were accused of corruption in the spending of public money; and, when those charges of corruption were refuted, they were accused of incompetence and of confusion, and of wishing not to have anything to do with the Act.
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: By whom?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: By hon. Members in this House.
  Mr. PEEL: Name a single case.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I am not sure the hon. Gentleman was not one himself.
  Mr. PEEL: That statement is entirely untrue. I made no such charge whatever. The right hon. Gentleman has no business, on the spur of the moment, to bring against me a charge for which he has no foundation.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: If the hon. Gentleman repudiates it, I certainly withdraw it
  1760
  as far as he is concerned. All I know is that for weeks I have had to answer questions put by hon. Gentlemen opposite suggesting these were party appointments, and suggesting public money was being spent on Liberal propagandism, charges which were utterly unworthy of the party opposite.
  Mr. FLAVIN: The hon. Member charged the Government with making political appointments under the Insurance Act.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: All the appointments were made by the Commissioners. What are the facts? The Commissioners have issued thirty different varieties of leaflets, with a circulation of 75,000,000 and all the examination which hon. Gentlemen opposite and their Friends have been able to give to those leaflets has shown no single flaw in them, nothing inaccurate as far as the Act is concerned, and nothing partial. One hundred and ten lecturers have given 5,000 lectures to 40,000 officials of approved societies, and to 900,000 members of the public; and in spite of the most minute examination and criticism not one statement made by those lecturers has been impeached in this House or outside. I should like to pay a special tribute to the work done by the Customs and Excise Department and by the Post Office, and especially to the work which has been done by the Stationery Office, unprecedented I think in the history of this country, without a flaw, without a break, and really without criticism in launching this gigantic scheme of reform. The hon. Gentleman said societies have not been approved. Eleven hundred Societies have been approved up to this present date.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: I said the small village societies.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Including a number of small village societies and affiliated village societies. What was the experience in this House and outside before 15th July? Continual prophecies of disaster, and columns of statements as to the chaos and confusion in the Insurance Commission offices. There was a general prophecy, stimulated by a general wish, that the Act would break down in the first week. One of the great newspapers said in response to a protest from myself that the whole of the administration of the Act has broken down. What are the actual facts?
  Mr. R. GWYNNE: Crewe.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Will the hon. Gentleman get up and say to this House what his friends have been saying in Crewe? What are the facts? A sudden silence amongst all these newspapers as to the chaos and confusion, an amazing absence of friction far greater than anything I foresaw in the launching of a new Act, and the statement that the Act would break down in the first week by one of the greatest newspapers of this country has been turned into the statement that there was a "lack of enthusiasm' in the operation of the Act. What are the facts as to the administration in respect of approved societies? Before the Act came into operation my right hon. Friend was able to announce the shattering figures, that 9,500,000 of 13,000,000 who would be compulsorily insured were already members of approved societies. That was altered to over 10,000,000 the day after the Act came into operation, and now without a doubt it is over 10,500,000. I think that is a moderate estimate of the insured persons who are now members of approved societies. What about the payments that are being made? In the first week of the Act before the first substantial payments were made 15,396,000 Insurance Stamps had been sold. In addition to that 1,250,000 insured persons were having their payments made through bulk insurance, that is payment by cheque on deposit, including over 100,000 who were being paid through Labour Exchanges, giving an aggregate of something like 16,600,000 of stamps which had been bought for the payment of contributions under the Insurance Act. I hope before Parliament rises to be able to give certain figures up to date as to the second week of the Act. The report of our inspectors, north, south, east, and west, is that the Act is working with smoothness and celerity and with satisfaction to all parties concerned. Certain foolish persons in limited areas of the country have declared themselves resisters and adopted a policy of anarchism, which I do not think they would have done if they had not been encouraged by most injudicious statements by the party opposite. I think the approved societies will see in the future administration of the Act that the interests of insured persons will not suffer thereby. When it is remembered that, not only is there a penalty under the Act for taking such a course, but that anyone who chooses to refuse to
  1762
  stamp the card of insured persons will have the privilege, not only of paying his own contribution, but the contribution of the insured persons, it will be realised that what they are pleased to call their resistance may prove more uncomfortable for themselves. But, after all, they are a small and negligible quantity.
  The great mass of the employers of this country have freely and willingly accepted the duty, and it is the testimony of the employers which has surprised me. One great employer, a Member of this House, came to me and said, "I waited until the Saturday before the Act came into operation, and took no action in regard to it. But on that Saturday I called my employés together; told them that the payments under the Act would begin next week, and that consequently I had better inform them about it. The whole of these employés, with the exception of three out of something over 1,000, immediately produced their insurance cards, told me that they knew all about the Act, and all they wanted was that I would be good enough to stamp the cards. When I came to inquire how they became insured, I found there were almost as many societies represented as there were insured persons." I have been told over and over again of cases in which practically whole bodies of working people have obtained insurance cards without any pressure from the employers, and have joined approved societies, utterly indifferent to the hubbub going on, thus showing once more the sound common sense of the working classes. What about the experience of the Insurance Commission? Up to the date of the commencement of the Act they were receiving and answering correspondence at the rate of about 7,000 letters per day. Since the Act has come into operation that correspondence has fallen steadily, showing without a shadow of doubt that a very great number of the problems which confronted the people have been solved by the active operation of the Act, and instead of the Act resulting in great confusion, chaos and unpopularity, its commencement, and every day since its commencement, has shown that the working people understand it and approve of the conditions under which it is worked.
  I have only one remark to make in conclusion, I have no criticism to make on the attitude of hon. Gentlemen opposite towards the Act when it was passing through Parliament. Indeed, I should not be in order if I attempted to pass criticism

  1763
  on that. But I think the record of their action in connection with the administration of the Act during the past six months is a record which history will declare to be one of the most discreditable. My hon. Friend the Member for East Northamptonshire was justified in asking me the other day whether in any nation in which a contributory national insurance scheme had been established such action has been performed by any large body of responsible persons such as has been performed by the party opposite.
  Mr. PEEL: I thought you ruled, Sir, that we were to be confined to discussing the administration of the Act. It appears to me that the right hon. Gentleman is now discussing the action of the Opposition.
  Mr. FLAVIN: Surely the right hon. Gentleman has a right to reply to the criticisms made by hon. Members above the Gangway.
  Mr. CHIOZZA MONEY: Are we not entitled—
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I think I am in full possession of the facts. I have already drawn the attention of the Committee to the somewhat severe limitations by which we are bound in dealing with Supplementary Estimates, and I have already, on two occasions, asked the right hon. Gentleman to confine himself within those limits. I gather he is just bringing his remarks to a conclusion.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Yes. As a matter of fact, I was replying to a definite statement made by hon. Gentlemen opposite as to the existence of confusion and chaos in connection with the administration of the Act, and I was endeavouring to keep within the bounds of order. These criticisms and these attacks are on the administration of the Insurance Act, which is now the law of the land, and which ought to be carried out impartially, and with the support of all persons, especially those who believe in a contributory system. This administration might have broken down but for two things, and these I will frankly confess to hon. Gentlemen opposite. The first is the amazing work done by the Insurance Commission. I should certainly be lacking in my sense of public duty if I did not take this opportunity of giving the fullest possible credit to the men who have accomplished so great a work in so short a space of time.
  1764
  The second reason why the administration has not been broken down is this: those who wished for the administration to break down altogether underestimated what the attitude of the working people would be towards it. We appealed to the sagacity, common sense, and self-respect of the working people of this country, and we have not appealed in vain.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: I am going to endeavour to keep myself within the bounds of order, but it is almost necessary for me to deal with some of the statements made by the Secretary for the Treasury. It is true he escaped with three calls to order. I will try to keep within that limit at least in the few remarks I propose to address to the Committee. I do not think there is anyone on whichever side of the House he sits, who does not recognise that the chief and only reason why the Act has not broken down in administration is that the Government have secured remarkable assistance from the Insurance Commissioners. If it had not been that they had got in the Insurance Commissioners, and in the Department, the pick of the service, this great Act could not possibly have survived the initial efforts which tried to bring it into force. But when the Secretary to the Treasury asks us to believe it is working with smoothness and celerity and satisfactorily, he is asking us to believe something which is not obvious to the eyes of those who are looking on, and who are not privileged to know what is going on inside the Commission. The right hon. Gentleman seems to have made a most unjustifiable attack on my hon. Friends who have addressed the Committee, each one of whom has been animated by a desire to bring before the Government certain points in connection with the administration of the Act, and if hon. Members opposite had listened to their speeches, they would have known that that was the case. My hon. Friends brought before the Secretary to the Treasury certain points connected with the administration of the Act, most of which the right hon. Gentleman has found it more convenient to pass by in silence. He asked us to believe that this Act was working now with great smoothness and satisfaction, because 1,100 societies and branches had been approved. I do not know if he remembers the total number of friendly societies which were in existence.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I did not say branches.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Well, 1,100 societies, including small societies, have been approved. I remember that there were 6,000 friendly societies with a number of members under 10,000, and many more above that number, so that at the best all that the Secretary to the Treasury can point to at the moment is that about one-sixth or one-seventh of the existing friendly societies, which were carrying on work before the Act came into operation, have obtained approval. We know that, in addition to these, trade unions, industrial insurance societies, and many others have come in as approved societies, so that I do not suppose I am putting it too high when I say that not one-eighth of the existing friendly societies, and probably not one-tenth of them, have become approved under the Act. The Secretary to the Treasury made the very interesting statement that there are 9½ millions of members of the approved societies which had sent in their returns at the time of the Woodford speech, or within a week after the Woodford speech, and that there are now 10½ millions out of the thirteen millions in approved societies. Will the right hon. Gentleman complete that information? Can he say how many of these were members of friendly societies existing at the time the Act came into operation, how many new members these friendly societies have got, and how many of the new members have gone to the industrial insurance societies and the trade unions? It would be extremely interesting if he would give us that information.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Our estimate is that 4 millions were members of the societies before the Act.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANS: The right hon. Gentleman has not taken my point. I remember the Chancellor of the Exchequer estimating that there were about 5 million members of friendly societies—probably 4½ millions, if you exclude duplicates.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I said about 5,500,000.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: That would be reduced to 4,500,000 if you exclude duplicates. What I want to know is how many out of the 10,500,000 now said to be members of approved societies belong to the old friendly societies and how many to the industrial insurance societies and the trade unions?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I understand the question put by the hon. Gentleman is this: How many of those who are now members of approved societies were members of the old societies?
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: That is not my question. My question is: How many members of approved societies now come within three categories: First, those who have joined a society which used to be a friendly society—of course, they have some new members; secondly, the industrial insurance societies have approved sections, how many have joined them; thirdly, the trade unions have approved sections, how many have joined them? Those are the three categories, and it will be very interesting if the Chancellor of the Exchequer can give us those figures.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I will work them out while you are concluding your speech.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The Secretary to the Treasury claimed—I do not know why—as some sort of evidence of the success of this scheme., that 16,600,000 stamps have been sold. Does he think that means that that number of people are insured, because I myself have rashly purchased £2 worth of stamps, and I have not the slightest doubt that many other hon. Members have done the same thing. They do not want to go to the Post Office every week for a sixpenny stamp, and they have bought them in advance. 16,600,000, instead of representing insured persons, may represent only one-half or one-fourth of that number. Why the Secretary to the Treasury quoted it at all, without any explanation, I do not know. The right hon. Gentleman also said that there was no confusion, and he pointed to the work which had been done by the Outworkers Committee and the Tuberculosis Committee. He said that all things were going well, and that the Act was settling down into operation. He is most unfortunate in the examples that he chooses. He chose the outworkers. The outworkers case will be remembered by hon. Gentlemen opposite, as well as by my hon. Friends, more especially by my hon. Friend the Member for South Somerset (Mr. Aubrey Herbert), who has very good reason to remember what has happened. Even now I understand that the wage earning unit has not been fixed; it is almost impossible to say what the outworkers are going to get by way of benefit, and the amount and method of their contribution has not been finally settled.

  1767
  With regard to the administration of the sanatorium benefit, again the right hon. Gentleman chose a most unfortunate example to show how well the Act is working. I was looking only yesterday at the report of one of the large County Council's County Insurance Committee. It is true they have appointed a Sanatoria Sub-Committee, but it has never met. It is true that they are going to have a Clerk to the Committee, but that clerk has not been appointed. That Committee is no more ready to administer the sanatorium benefit in that county than is the right hon. Gentleman himself. He said that sanatorium benefit does not only mean sanatorium treatment. That we all know. What was called the cod-liver-oil-treatment has to be approved by the Local Government Board, as well as by the Treasury, before it can be given. So far as I know, the Local Government Board have not yet prescribed the particular dose of cod-liver oil that is to be given as sanatorium treatment. The right hon. Gentleman also accused us of saying in the dark what we dare not say in the daylight. He accused us of saying something at Crewe which we dare not repeat in this House. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Apparently some hon. Members are found to support that. I spoke at Crewe. I do not know whether my speech was reported or not, but I am quite willing he should go through every single word in that speech, and I defy him to point to any single part of that speech which he could qualify, or that he thinks I ought to qualify.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Will the hon. Gentleman repeat in this House the most conspicuous placard and cartoon issued by his party at Crewe, in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer was charged with taking 4d. under the pretence of insurance from every working man and spending it in paying £400 to Members of Parliament?
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The right hon. Gentleman, with his usual inaccuracy, has misquoted the poster. He has put words into it which are not in that poster, and hon. Members cheer his statement. I assume hon. Gentlemen opposite know what the poster was. [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes."] I do not intend, although the right hon. Gentleman has been three times called to Order, to go into that. I intend, if I can, to avoid being called to
  1768
  Order for dealing with matters entirely extraneous; but I will read, for the benefit of hon. Members opposite, something apropos of the sanatorium treatment which was used at Crewe. I have a document called the "Money Box." I believe the hon. Member (Mr. Chiozza Money) does not claim authorship. His portrait appears amongst others, but it is said not to have been named after him. At any rate it is called the "Money Box." This I am told was thrust into every household in Crewe. I will ask hon. Members if any single one of them can justify the statements in it.
  "Up among the chimney pots, when the cats keep you awake at night, and the heavy air floats up at all hours from the hack yards and dustbins below, it is not possible to get properly well. Far away from the dust and din of cities they are being built near the sea or amongst moors and mountains."
  There is a sort of family likeness to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that phraseology, and I am not at all sure that he will disown authorship of it.
  "You can rest there, tended night and day by skilled hands, until you hare quite recovered health and strength."
  Would hon. Members believe that there is not a single sanatorium at present being built either on moor or mountain owing to the Insurance Act? There is a sum of £1,600,000 set apart for the purpose, but what is stated here is that when you cannot get well among the chimney pots you can go up to the moors and mountains and rest in a sanatorium provided under the Insurance Act. No more untrue statement could possibly be issued in support of the Insurance Act. When the right hon. Gentleman challenges us about a poster which he misquotes he ought to look home amongst his own people. This is an official document issued by the Liberal Insurance Committee.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: And yours is by a Conservative Association.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: And I
  am quite willing to take responsibility for it, and if the right hon. Gentleman will study it along with the statement that he made about five minutes ago, he will see where he needs to correct his statement. There are other matters which I should like to discuss, but it seems almost impossible. We are allowed an hour and a half to deal with sums aggregating £2,266,000. The original Estimate for sickness insurance for this year was £2,032,300, including various items -which appear on other Votes.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: These are the figures the hon. Member asked for—Friendly societies and trade unions 6,000,000, industrial insurance societies 4,500,000.
  An HON. MEMBER: Are these new members?
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: These are not new members, but the figures including those who were members before the commencement of the Act. Five and a half milions were members of trade unions and friendly societies, getting sickness benefit, subject to duplicates, and now the duplicates are eliminated.
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: After eliminating it came to 4,000,000.
  Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: That was never a definite figure. It was 4,500,000 or 4,000,000. Assuming that it was 4,000,000, it appears that the friendly societies and trade unions between them have succeeded in getting 2,000,000 new members, and the industrial insurance offices have 4,500,000 new members.
  It being Tea of the clock, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15, to put forthwith the Question necessary to dispose of the Vote under discussion.
  Question put, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £42,400, be granted for the said Service."
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 180; Noes, 301.

  Division No. 168.]

  AYES.

  [10.2 p.m.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Dixon, C. H.

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Du Cros, Arthur Philip

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Duke, Henry Edward

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

  Ashley, W. W.

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (S. Geo.,Han.S.)

  Astor, Waldorf

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  MacCaw, W. J. MacGeagh

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

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

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Baird, J. L.

  Falle, B. G.

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

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

  Fell, Arthur

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Malcolm, Ian

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Barnston, Harry

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Newman, John R. P.

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

  Glimour, Captain J.

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

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

  Glazebrook, Capt. Philip K.

  Nield, Herbert

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

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

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Grant, J. A.

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

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Gretton, John

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Bigland, Alfred

  Guinness, Hon. W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

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

  Bird, Alfred

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid.)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Henderson, Major H. (Abingdon)

  Pryce-Jones, Colonel E.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Rawson, Colonel Richard H.

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Hickman, Colonel T. E.

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Burn, Col. C. R.

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Butcher, J. G.

  Hills, J. W.

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Campion, W. R.

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Hohler, G. F.

  Rutherford, W. (Liverpool, W. Derby)

  Cassel, Felix

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Cator, John

  Horne, W. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Cautley, H. S.

  Horner, A. L.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Cave, George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Clay, Capt. H. H. Spender

  Kerry, Earl of

  Stanler, Beville

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Clyde, James Avon

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feethum

  Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Stewart, Gershom

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle)

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, N.)

  Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End

  Swift, Rigby

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C, Scott

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Ward, Arnold S. (Herts, Watford)

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

  Terrell, G. (Wilts, N.W.)

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North)

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

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset, W.)

  Yerburgh, Robert

  Touche, George Alexander

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud

  Younger, Sir George

  Valentia, Viscount

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

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Wolmer, Viscount

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. R.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Gwynne and Mr. Worthington'Evans.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Lansbury, George

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Agnew, Sir George William

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumg'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Leach, Charles

  Alden, Percy

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton)

  Falconer, J.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Armitage, R.

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Low, Sir F. (Norwich)

  Arnold, Sydney

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Lundon, Thomas

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Ffrench, Peter

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Fltzgibbon, John

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury E.)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  France, G. A.

  Macdonaid, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Furness, Stephen

  McGhee, Richard

  Barnes, G. N.

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Barton, William

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Glanville, Harold James

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

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

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding)

  Bentham, G. J.

  Greig, Col. J. W.

  Manfield, Harry

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Martin, J.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset)

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Boland, John Pius

  Hackett, J.

  Meagher, Michael

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Hancock, J. G.

  Middlebrook, William

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Millar, James Duncan

  Brady, P. J.

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Molloy, M.

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Mond, Sir Alfred M.

  Bryce, J. Annan

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

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

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

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Harwood, George

  Mooney, J. J.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Morgan, George Hay

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Morrell, Phillip

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Morison, Hector

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

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Hayward, Evan

  Muldoon, John

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Munro, Robert

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Chancellor, H. G.

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

  Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Henry, Sir Charles S.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Clough, William

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

  Needham, Christopher, T.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Neilson, Francis

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Hinds, John

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Hodge, John

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hogge, James Myles

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Nuttall, Harry

  Cotton, William Francis

  Holt, Richard Durning

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Crooks, William

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  O'Dowd, John

  Crumley, Patrick

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Ogden, Fred

  Cullinan, J.

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  O'Grady, James

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

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

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  O'Malley, William

  Dawes, James Arthur

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts., Stepney)

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

  De Forest, Baron

  Jowett, F. W.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Delany, William

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Shee, James John

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Keating M.

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Devlin, Joseph

  Kellaway, Frederick George

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Kelly, Edward

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Dillon, John

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Doris, W.

  King, J. (Somerset, North)

  Philipps, Colonel Ivor (Southampton)

  Duffy, William J.

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S.Molton)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  1772

  1773

  Pointer, Joseph

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

  Wadsworth, J.

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C. E.

  Wardle, George J.

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

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

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

  Webb, H.

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

  Sheehy, David

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Shortt, Edward

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

  Radford, George Heynes

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Smith, H. B. L. (Northampton)

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Whyte, Alexander F.

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Snowden, P.

  wiles, Thomas

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Seames, Arthur Wellesley

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Reddy, Michael

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Summers, James Woolley

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

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Sutton, John E.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Yoxall, Sir. James Henry

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Rowlands, James

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Illingworth and Mr. Gulland.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Original Question put, and agreed to.

  The CHAIRMAN then proceeded to put severally the Questions, That the total amounts of the Votes outstanding in each class of the Civil Service Estimates, and the total amount of the Votes outstanding for the Navy and Army (including Ordnance Factories) and the Revenue Departments, be granted for the said Services, as denned in those Classes and Estimates:—

  Class I.
  4. "That a sum, not exceeding £485,141, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class I. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:—

  £

  6.

  Art and Science Buildings, Great Britain (Supplementary sum)

  38,350

  7.

  Diplomatic and Consular Buildings (Supplementary sum)

  20,000

  9.

  Labour Exchange and Insurance Buildings, Great Britain (Supplementary sum)

  135,000

  12.

  Harbours under the Board of Trade

  55,065

  13.

  Peterhead Harbour

  21,000

  15.

  Public Works and Buildings, Ireland

  173,366

  16.

  Railways, Ireland

  42,360

  £485,141"

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 302; Noes, 189.

  Division No. 169.]

  AYES.

  [10.15 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Barnes, George N.

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  Bryce, John Annan

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Barton, William

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Agnew, Sir George William

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Alden, Percy

  Benn, W. W. (T. H'mts., St. George)

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)

  Allen, Arthur Acland (Dumbartonshire)

  Bentham, George Jackson

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

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Armitage, R.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Arnold, Sydney

  Black, Arthur W.

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

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Boland, John Pius

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Clough, William

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Brady, P. J.

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Joyce, Michael

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Keating, Matthew

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

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Kellaway, Frederick George

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Kelly, Edward

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

  Cotton, William Francis

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Radford, G. H.

  Crooks, William

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S,Molton)

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Crumley, Patrick

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Raphael, Sir Herbert Henry

  Cullinan, John

  Lansbury, George

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Davies, E. William (Eifion)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Reddy, Michael

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Dawes, James Arthur

  Leach, Charles

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  De Forest, Baron

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Delany, William

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Devlin, Joseph

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Lundon, Thomas

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Dillon, John

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Donelan, Captain A,

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Doris, William

  Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester)

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Duffy, William J.

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  McGhee, Richard

  Rowlands, James

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Maclean, Donald

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

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

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Essex, Richard Walter

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Falconer, James

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C. E.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding)

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Manfield, Harry

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

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Sheehy, David

  Ffrench, Peter

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Fitzgibbon, John

  Meagher, Michael

  Shortt, Edward

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Middlebrook, William

  Smith, H. B. L. (Northampton)

  Furness, Stephen

  Millar, James Duncan

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim)

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Molloy, Michael

  Snowden, Philip

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Mond, Sir Alfred Moritz

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Glanville, H. J.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Summers, James Woolley

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Mooney, John J.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Morgan, George Hay

  Sutton, John E.

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Morrell, Philip

  Taylor, John (Durham)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Morison, Hector

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Griffith, Ellis Jones (Anglesey)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Tennant, Harold John

  Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)

  Muldoon, John

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Hackett, J.

  Munro, Robert

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Hancock, John George

  Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Needham, Christopher T.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Neilson, Francis

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Wadsworth, J.

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

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

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Harwood, George

  Norton, Captain Cecil William

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Wardle, George J.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  O'Brien, Patrick Kilkenny)

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Webb, H.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  O'Dowd, John

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Ogden, Fred

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

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

  O'Grady, James

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Henry, Sir Charles S.

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

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

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

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Higham, John Sharp

  O'Malley, William

  Wiles, Thomas

  Hinds, John

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

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Hodge, John

  O'Shee, James John

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Hogge, James Myles

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

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

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney)

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Illingworth and Mr. Gulland.

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  1776

  1777

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

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

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

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

  Ashley, W. W.

  Fleming, Valentine

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Astor, Waldorf

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

  Pease, Herbert pike (Darlington)

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge).

  Baird, J. L.

  Gibbs, G. A.

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

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

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Glazebrook, Capt. Philip K.

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Grant, James Augustus

  Pryce-Jones, Col. E. (Montgom'y B'ghs)

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Gretton, John

  Rawson, Col. Richard H.

  Barnston, H.

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Barrie, Hugh T. (Londonderry)

  Guinness, Hon. W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Haddock, George Banr

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W Derby)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Henderson, Major H. (Berkshire)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Bigland, Alfred

  Hickman, Colonel T. E.

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Bird, Alfred

  Hill, Sir Clement

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Hills, J. W.

  Stanier, Beville

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Brassey, Leonard Campbell

  Hohler, G. F.

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Stewart, Gershom

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Horne, Wm. E (Surrey, Guildford)

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)

  Burgoyne, W. H.

  Horner, Andrew Long

  Swift, Rigby

  Burn, Colonel C. R.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Butcher, J. G. (York)

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Campion, W. R.

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Kerry, Earl of

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Cator, John

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North)

  Cautley, H. S.

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Cave, George

  Knight, Captain E. A.

  Touche, George Alexander

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Law, Rt. Hon. A Bonar (Bootle)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Lawson, Hon. Harry (Mile End)

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

  Clyde, James Avon

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

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

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

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

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

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (S. Geo., Han.S.)

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud

  Craik, Sir Henry

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

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

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  M'Neill, Ranald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott-

  Malcolm, Ian

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

  Dixon, C. H.

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Du Cros, Arthur Philip

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Yate, Colonel C. E.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Yerburgh, Robert

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Younger, Sir George

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Newdegtae, F. A.

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

  Newman, J. R. P.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir

  Falle, B. G.

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  F. Flannery and Mr. Pollock.

  Fell, Arthur

  Nield, Herbert

  Class II.
  5. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,898,239, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class II. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:—
  1778

  £

  1.

  House of Lords Offices

  14,741

  2.

  House of Commons

  217,850

  5.

  Foreign Office

  38,420

  6.

  Colonial Office

  39,075

  7.

  Privy Council Office

  5,646

  8.

  Board of Trade (including a Supplementary sum of £3,750)

  226,862

  1779

  £

  9.

  Mercantile Marine Services

  64,788

  10.

  Bankruptcy Department of the Board of Trade

  5

  12.

  Charity Commission

  16,313

  13.

  Government Chemist

  10,633

  14.

  Civil Service Commission

  33,134

  15.

  Exchequer and Audit Department

  41,260

  16.

  Friendly Societies Registry

  7,122

  17.

  Local Government Board

  168,374

  18.

  Lunacy Commission, England

  11,830

  20.

  National Debt Office

  7,580

  21.

  Public Record Office

  15,320

  22.

  Public Works Loan Commission

  29

  23.

  Registrar General's Office, England

  35,405

  24.

  Stationery and Printing

  459,751

  27.

  Secret Service

  23,000

  Scotland.

  28.

  Secretary for Scotland's Office

  9,626

  29.

  Board of Agriculture, Scotland

  99,580

  30.

  Fishery Board

  16,428

  £

  31.

  Lunacy Commission

  3,623

  32.

  Registrar General's Office

  5,856

  33.

  Local Government Board

  11,918

  Ireland.

  £

  34.

  Household of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland

  2,052

  35.

  Chief Secretary for Ireland

  16,296

  36.

  Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction

  56,314

  37.

  Charitable Donations and Bequests Office

  1,252

  38.

  Congested Districts Board for Ireland (Grants-in-Aid)

  106,100

  39.

  Local Government Board

  66,688

  40.

  Public Record Office

  4,846

  41.

  Public Works Office

  26,969

  42.

  Registrar General's Office

  11,258

  43.

  Valuation and Boundary Survey

  22,295

  £1,898,239."

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 296; Noes, 199.

  Division No. 170.]

  AYES.

  [10.25 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Doris, W.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Duffy, William J.

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Agnew, Sir George William

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

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Byles, Sir Wiliam Pollard

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Alden, Percy

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton)

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

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Armitage, Robert

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Falconer, J.

  Arnold, Sydney

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Clough, William

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Clynes, John R.

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Ffrench, Peter

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Fitzgibbon, John

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  France, G. A.

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick Burghs)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Furness, Stephen

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Cotton, William Francis

  George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

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

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Glanville, Harold James

  Bentham, G. J.

  Crooks, William

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Crumley, Patrick

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Cullinan, J.

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Davies, E. William (Eifion)

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Boland, John Plus

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Dawes, James Arthur

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Bowerman, C. W.

  De Forest, Baron

  Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Delany, William

  Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.)

  Brady, P. J.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Hackett, J.

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Hancock, John George

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Dillon, John

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Meagher, Michael

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

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

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Harwood, George

  Middlebrook, William

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Millar, James Duncan

  Rowlands, James

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Molloy, M.

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Mond, Sir Alfred Moritz

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

  Hayward, Evan

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Mooney, J. J.

  Scanlan, Thomas

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

  Morgan, George Hay

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C. E.

  Henry, Sir Charles E. H.

  Morrell, Philip

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

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

  Morison, Hector

  Sheehy, David

  Higham, John Sharp

  Muldoon, John

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Hinds, John

  Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C.

  Shortt, Edward

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  Hodge, John

  Needham, Christopher T.

  Smith, H. B. L. (Northampton)

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Neilson, Francis

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Snowden, Philip

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Nolan, Joseph

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Hughes, S. L.

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

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

  Jardine, sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Summers, James Woolley

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Sutton, John E.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)

  O'Dowd, John

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Ogden, Fred

  Tennant, Harold John

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Grady, James

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Keating, Matthew

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

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Kellaway, Frederick George

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Kelly, Edward

  O'Malley, William

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

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

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Kilbride, Denis

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  King, J. (Somerset, North)

  O'Shee, James John

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S.Molton)

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Wadsworth, J.

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  Lansbury, George

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Wardle, George J.

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Leach, Charles

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Webb, H.

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Pointer, Joseph

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

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

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Lundon, Thomas

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

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

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Lynch, A. A.

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

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

  Williams, Llewellyn (Carmarthen)

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  McGhee, Richard

  Radford, G. H.

  Williamson, Sir Archibald

  Maclean, Donald

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

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

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Reddy, M.

  Winfrey, Richard

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs. Spalding)

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Manfield, Harry

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Illingworth and Mr. Gulland.

  Martin, Joseph

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Barnston, Harry

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

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

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

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

  Bull, Sir William James

  Ashley, W. W.

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Astor, Waldorf

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Burn, Colonel C. R.

  Baird, J. L.

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Butcher, J. G.

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

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Campion, W. R.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Cassel, Felix

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Bigland, Alfred

  Cator, John

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Bird, A.

  Cautley, H. S.

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott (Somerset)

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Cave, George

  Barnes, G. N.

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  1782

  1783

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Rawson, Col. R. H.

  Clay, Capt. H. H. Spender

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Horne, W. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Horner, Andrew Long

  Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W. Derby)

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Kerry, Earl of

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkealdy)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Sassoon, Sir Philip

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Knight, Captain E. A.

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Dixon, C. H.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts, Mile End)

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

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

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Falle, Bertram, Godfray

  Lonsdale, Sir John (Brownlee)

  Stewart, Gershom

  Fell, Arthur

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

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

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

  Swift, Rigby

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Fleming, Valentine

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Terrell, G. (Wilts, N.W.)

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

  Malcolm, Ian

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

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

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Glimour, Captain John

  Morison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Touche, George Alexander

  Glazebrook, Capt. Philip K.

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Valentia, Viscount

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Munro, R.

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Grant, J. A.

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Greene, W. R.

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Gretton, John

  Newman, John R. P.

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E,)

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

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

  Guinness, Hon.W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Nield, Herbert

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Norton-Griffiths, John

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

  Haddock, George Bahr

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

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

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

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

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

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

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

  Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Yate, Col. Charles Edward

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Hickman, Colonel T. E.

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Younger, Sir George

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Hills, John Waller

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Pringle, William M. R.

  S. Roberts and Mr. Stanier.

  Hogge, James Myles

  Pryce-Jones, Col. E.

  Class III.
  6. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,512,530, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class III. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:

  £

  1.

  Law Charges

  43,812

  2.

  Miscellaneous Legal Expenses

  23,194

  3.

  Supreme Court of Judicature and Court of Criminal Appeal

  184,632

  4.

  Land Registry

  23,471

  5.

  Public Trustee

  7

  6.

  County Courts

  3

  1784

  £

  7.

  Police, England and Wales

  56,998

  8.

  Prisons, England and the Colonies

  376,550

  9.

  Reformatory and Industrial Schools, Great Britain

  147,474

  10.

  Criminal Lunatic Asylums, England

  51,154

  Scotland.

  11.

  Law Charges and Courts of Law

  52,373

  12.

  Scottish Land Court

  5,600

  13.

  Register House, Edinburgh

  25,966

  14.

  Prisons

  59,776

  Ireland.

  15.

  Law Charges and Criminal Prosecutions

  35,410

  1785

  £

  16.

  Supreme Court of Judicature and other Legal Departments

  67,135

  17.

  Irish Land Commission

  386,147

  18.

  County Court Officers, etc.

  71,145

  19.

  Dublin Metropolitan Police

  36,466

  20.

  Royal Irish Constabulary

  747,389

  21.

  Prisons

  67,439

  £

  22.

  Reformatory and Industrial Schools

  46,912

  23.

  Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum

  3,477

  £2,512,530"

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 309; Noes, 192.

  Division No. 171.]

  AYES.

  [10.38 p.m

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Dawes, James Arthur

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  De Forest, Baron

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Delany, William

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Agnew, Sir George William

  Devlin, Joseph

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Alden, Percy

  Dillon, John

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Doris, W.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Armitage, R.

  Duffy, William J.

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)

  Arnold, Sydney

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Joyce, Michael

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Keating, Matthew

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Kellaway, Frederick George

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Kelly, Edward

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Barnes, G. N.

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Kilbride, Denis

  Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick Burghs)

  Falconer, James

  King, J. (Somerset, North)

  Barton, William

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S.Molton)

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Lansbury, George

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Ffrench, Peter

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

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

  Fitzgibbon, John

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Bentham, G. J.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Bethell, Sir John Henry

  France, G. A.

  Leach, Charles

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Furness, Stephen

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Black, Arthur W.

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Boland, John Pius

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Glanville, H. J.

  Lundon, Thomas

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Brady, P. J.

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Lynch, A. A.

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  McGhee, Richard

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Maclean, Donald

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gulland, John W.

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Hackett, J.

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

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

  Hancock, J. G.

  McCallum, Sir John M.

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood)

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding)

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Manfield, Harry

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

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

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Clancy, John Joseph

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

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

  Clough, William

  Harwood, George

  Martin, J.

  Clynes, John R.

  Maslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Meagher, Michael

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Middlebrook, William

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hayward, Evan

  Millar, James Duncan

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Molloy, M.

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Cotton, William Francis

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

  Mond, Sir Alfred M.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Henry, Sir Charles S.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

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

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Crooks, William

  Higham, John Sharp

  Mooney, John J.

  Crumley, Patrick

  Hinds, John

  Morgan, George Hay

  Cullinan, J.

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Morrell, Philip

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Hodge, John

  Morison, Hector

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Hogge, James Myles

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Muldoon, John

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Sutton, John E.

  Munro, R.

  Radford, George Heynes

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Hurray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Needham, Christopher

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Neilson, Francis

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Thorne, G. (Wolverhampton)

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Reddy, Michael

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Redmond, William (Clare E.)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Nuttall, Harry

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Verney, Sir Harry

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Wadsworth, J.

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  O'Dowd, John

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Ogden, Fred

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Wardle, George J.

  O'Grady, James

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

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

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Webb, H.

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Rowlands, James

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  O'Malley, William

  Rowntree, Arnold

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

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

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

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

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

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

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  O'Shee, James John

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Wiles, Thomas

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C. E.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Bridgeton)

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

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

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)

  Sheehy, David

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

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

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Shortt, Edward

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs. N.)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Smith, H. B. L. (Northampton)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Snowden, Philip

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

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

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

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

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

  Summers, James Woolley

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

  Primrose, Hon. Nell James

  Sutherland, J. E.

  G. Howard and Captain Guest.

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Cave, George

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Astor, Waldorf

  Clay, Capt. H. H. Spender

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)

  Baird, J. L.

  Clyde, James Avon

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Baicarres, Lord

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Hill, Sir Clement L. (Shrewsbury)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Hills, John Waller

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Barnston, H.

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Barrie, H. T.

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Hope, James (Fitzalan, Sheffield)

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

  Dixon, C. H.

  Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Du Cros, Arthur Philip

  Horner, Andrew Long

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

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

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Falle, B. G.

  Kerry, Earl of

  Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-

  Fell, Arthur

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Bigland, Alfred

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

  Knight, Captain E. A.

  Bird, A.

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Fleming, Valentine

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts, Mile End)

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

  Lewisham, viscount

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Gibb, G. A.

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Burdett-Coutts, William

  Glazebrook, Captain Philip K.

  Lonsdale, Sir John (Brownlee)

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Goldstone, Frank

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

  Burn, Colonel C. R.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (S. Geo. Han. S.)

  Butcher, John George

  Grant, J. A.

  MacCaw, William J. McGeagh

  Campion, W. R.

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Gretton, John

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Cassel, Felix

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Malcolm, Ian

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Guinness, Hon. W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Cator, John

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Cautley, H. S.

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  1788

  1789

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Royds, Edmund

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North)

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Rutherford, John (Lancs., Oarwen)

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Newman, John R. P.

  Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W. Derby)

  Touche, George Alexander

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Nield, Herbert

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Walker, Col. William Hall

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

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

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

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Ward, Arnold S. (Herts, Watford)

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Sassoon, Sir Philip

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

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

  Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

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

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

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Stanler, Bevilie

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

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Stewart, Gershom

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

  Pryce-Jones, Col. E.

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Rawlinson, John Frederick

  Swift, Rigby

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Rawson, Colonel R. H.

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Yerburgh, Robert A.

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Younger, Sir George

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  R. Baker and Mr. R. M'Neill.

  Class IV.
  7. "That a sum, not exceeding £10,667,629, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IV. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:

  £

  1.

  Board of Education (including a Supplementary sum of £15,000)

  9,269,765

  2.

  British Museum

  114,071

  3.

  National Gallery

  7,445

  4.

  National Portrait Gallery

  2,681

  5.

  Wallace Collection

  5,011

  6.

  Scientific Investigation, etc.

  85,523

  7.

  Universities and Colleges (Great Britain, and Intermediate Education, Wales).

  214,200

  £

  9.

  National Galleries, Scotland

  4,098

  Ireland.

  10.

  Public Education (including a Supplementary sum of £10,000)

  779,554

  11.

  Endowed Schools Commissioners

  535

  12.

  National Gallery

  1,155

  13.

  Science and Art

  113,591

  14.

  Universities and Colleges

  70,000

  £10,667,629"

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 312; Noes, 191.

  Division No. 172.]

  AYES.

  [10.50 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

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

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Byles, Sir Wiliam Pollard

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Benn, W. W. (T. H'mts., St. George)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Agnew, Sir George

  Bentham, G. J.

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Alden, Percy

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Allen, Arthur Acland (Dumbartonshire)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Boland, John Plus

  Clough, William

  Armitage, R.

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Clynes, J. R.

  Arnold, Sydney

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Collins, G. F. (Greenock)

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Brady, J. P.

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Cotton, William Francis

  Barnes, George N.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Barton, William

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Crooks, William

  Crumley, Patrick

  Kelly, Edward

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Cullinan, J.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

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

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

  Davies, E. William (Eifion)

  King, J, (Somerset, N.)

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

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S.Molton)

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Dawes, J. A.

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  De Forest, Baron

  Lansbury, George

  Radford, George Heynes

  Delany, William

  Lardner, Carrige Rushe

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Leach, Charles

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Dillon, John

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Reddy, M.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Doris, W.

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Duffy, Wiliam J.

  Low, Sir F. (Norwich)

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lundon, T.

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Lynch, A. A.

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  McGhee, Richard

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Maclean, Donald

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Falconer, J.

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Farrell, James Patrick

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Rowlands, James

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Ffrench, Peter

  McCallum, Sir John M.

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

  Fitzgibbon, John

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  France, G. A.

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding)

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Furness, Stephen W.

  Manfield, Harry

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C E.

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

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

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Martin, Joseph

  Sheehy, David

  Glanville, H. J.

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Meagher, Michael

  Shortt, Edward

  Greenwood, Granville C. (Peterborough)

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Middlebrook, William

  Smith, H. B. L. (Northampton)

  Greig, Colonel James William

  Millar, James Duncan

  Smyth, Thomas F, (Leitrim, S.)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Molloy, M.

  Snowden, Philip

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Guest, Hon. Major C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Mond, Sir Alfred Moritz

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Gulland, John William

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Hackett, John

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Summers, James Woolley

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Mooney, J. J.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Hancock, J. G.

  Morgan, George Hay

  Sutton, John E.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Morrell, Philip

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Morison, Hector

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Tennant, Harrold John

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Muldoon, John

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Harmsworth, R. L, (Caithness-shire)

  Munro, R.

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

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

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

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

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Harwood, George

  Nannetti, Joseph

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Needham, Christopher T.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Neilson, Francis

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Wadsworth, J.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Nolan, Joseph

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Incs)

  Hayward, Evan

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Nuttall, Harry

  Wardle, George J.

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

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Warner, Sir Thomas (Courtenay)

  Henry, Sir Charles

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Webb, H.

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

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Higham, John Sharp

  O'Dowd, John

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Hinds, John

  Ogden, Fred

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

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  O'Grady, James

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Hodge, John

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

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Hogge, James Myles

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  O'Malley, William

  Wiles, Thomas

  Holt, Richard Durning

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

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Hughes, S. L.

  O'Shee, James John

  Williams, P. (Middlesbrough)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

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

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Swansea)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Rotherham)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  Jowett, F, W.

  Pointer, Joseph

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Joyce, Michael

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Keating, M.

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Captain

  Kellaway, Frederick George

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Guest and Mr. G. Howard.

  1792

  1793

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

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

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

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

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Ashley, W. W.

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Pease, Robert Pike (Darlington)

  Astor, Waldorf

  Fleming, Valentine

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Bagot, Lieut.-Col. J.

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

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

  Baird, J. L.

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Perkins, Walter Frank

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

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Glazebrook, Philip K.

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Pryce-Jones, Col. E,

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Grant, J. A.

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Greene, W. R.

  Rawson, Col. R. H.

  Barnston, H.

  Gretton, John

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Barrie, H. T.

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Guinness, Hon.W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Royds, Edmund

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen)

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W. Derby)

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Harrison Broadley, H. B.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Bentinck, Lord H. (Cavendish-

  Henderson, Major Harold (Berkshire)

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Seresford, Lord C.

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Bigland, Alfred

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Bird, A.

  Hickman, Colonel T. E.

  Sassoon, Sir Philip

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hills, John Waller

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hohler, G. F.

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford)

  Stewart, Gershom

  Burn, Colonel C. R.

  Horner, A. L.

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, N.)

  Butcher, John George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Swift, Rigby

  Campion, W. R.

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Cassel, Felix

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Kerry, Earl of

  Terrell, G. (Wilts, N.W.)

  Cator, John

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Cautley, H. S.

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North)

  Cave, George

  Knight, Captain E. A.

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Touche, George Alexander

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts, Mile End)

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Valentia, Viscount

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Ward, Arnold S. (Herts, Watford)

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

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

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

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (S. Geo. Han. S.)

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Mackinder, H. J.

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

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  M'Neill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Malcolm, Ian

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Dixon, C. H.

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

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

  Du Cros, Arthur Philip

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Younger, Sir George

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Newman, John R. P.

  Faber, Captain W. B. (Hants, W.)

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Falle, B. G.

  Nield, Herbert

  Harris and Mr. Stanier.

  Fell, Arthur

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Question put, and agreed to.

  Class V.
  8. "That a sum, not exceeding £426,014, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class V. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:—
  1794

  £

  1.

  Diplomatic and Consular Services

  404,040

  3.

  Telegraph Subsidies and Pacific Cable

  29,974

  4.

  Cyprus (Grant-in-Aid)

  1,000

  £426,014"

  Class VI.
  9. "That a sum, not exceeding £7,837,464, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VI. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:—

  £

  1.

  Superannuation and Retired Allowances

  418,253

  2.

  Miscellaneous, Charitable, and other Allowances

  339

  3.

  Hospitals and Charities Ireland

  883

  4.

  Savings Banks' and Friendly Societies' Deficiencies

  14,426

  5.

  Old Age Pensions

  7,400,000

  6.

  Copyright Compensation

  3,563

  £7,837,464."

  Class VII.
  10. "That a sum, not exceeding £171,969, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VII. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:—

  £

  1.

  Temporary Commissions

  18,000

  2.

  Miscellaneous Expenses

  9,012

  3.

  Repayments to the Local Loans Fund

  3,418

  4.

  Ireland Development Grant

  1,000

  5.

  Government Hospitality

  5,000

  6.

  International Exhibitions

  30,000

  7.

  Repayments to the Civil Contingencies Fund

  5,539

  8.

  Expenses under the Unemployed Workmen Act, 1905

  100,000

  £171,969"

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 312; Noes, 191.

  Division No. 173.]

  AYES.

  [11.2 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid)

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

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

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Agnew, Sir George

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Alden, Percy

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

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Allen, A. A. (Dumbartonshire)

  Chancellor, Henry George

  Falconer, James

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Armitage, R.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Arnold, Sydney

  Clough, William

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Clynes, John R.

  Ffrench, Peter

  Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A.

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Fitzgibbon, John

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Furness, Stephen

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Barran, Sir J. N. (Hawick)

  Cotton, William Francis

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Barton, William

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Glanville, H. J.

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Crooks, William

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Crumley, Patrick

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

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

  Cullinan, J.

  Greig, Colonel James William

  Bentham, G. J.

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Guest, Hon. Major C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Dawes, J. A.

  Gulland, John William

  Boland, John Pius

  De Forest, Baron

  Hackett, John

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Delany, William

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Hancock, J. G.

  Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

  Devlin, Joseph

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Brady, P. J.

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Dillon, John

  Hardie, J. Kerr (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Doris, William

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Duffy, William J.

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

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

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

  Harwood, George

  Meagher, Michael

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Middlebrook, William

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Millar, James Duncan

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Molloy, Michael

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Hayward, Evan

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Rowlands, James

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Mond, Sir Alfred M.

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

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

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

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

  Henry, Sir Charles

  Mooney, John J.

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

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

  Morgan, George Hay

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Morrell, Philip

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Hinds, John

  Morison, Hector

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E.

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  Hodge, John

  Muldoon, John

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

  Hogge, James Myles

  Munro, Robert

  Sheehy, David

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.

  Shortt, Edward

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  Nannetti, Joseph

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Needham, Christopher T.

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Nolan, Joseph

  Snowden, P.

  Jardine, Sir John (Roxburgh)

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Swansea)

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Sutherland, John E.

  Jones, W. S. Glyn. (T. H'mts, Stepney)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Sutton, John E.

  Jowett, Frederick William

  O'Dowd, John

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Joyce, Michael

  Ogden, Fred

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Keating, Matthew

  O'Grady, James

  Tennant, Harold John

  Kellaway, Frederick George

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

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Kelly, Edward

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Malley, William

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Kilbride, Denis

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

  Toulmin, Sir George

  King, Joseph (Somerset, North)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S.Molton)

  O'Shee, James John

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Wadsworth, John

  Lansbury, George

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  Lardner, James Carrlge Rushe

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Lawson Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Wardle, George J.

  Leach, Charles

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Webb, H.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Pirle, Duncan Vernon

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Pointer, Joseph

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

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

  Lundon, Thomas

  Ponsonby A. W. H.

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Whyte, A. F.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

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

  Wiles, Thomas

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  McGhee, Richard

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

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Maclean, Donald

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Williamson, Sir Archibald

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Radford, G. H.

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

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  McCallum, Sir John M.

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Winfrey, Richard

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Reddy, Michael

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas)

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Manfield, Harry

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

  Martin, Joseph

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  G. Howard and Captain Guest.

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Bird, Alfred

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Barnston, H.

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Archer-Shee, Major W.

  Barrie, H. T.

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

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

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Astor, Waldorf

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Bull, Sir William James

  Baird, John Lawrence

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

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

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Burgoyne, Alan Hughes

  Balcarres, Lord

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Burn, Col. C. R.

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Bennett-Goldney Francis

  Butcher, John George

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-

  Campion, W. R.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Beresford, Lord Charles

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Bigland, Alfred

  Cassel, Felix

  1798

  1799

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Cator, John

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hills, J. W.

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Cave, George

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Royds, Edmund

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen)

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Horne, E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W. Derby)

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Horner, Andrew Long

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Clive, Captain Percy Archer

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Clyde, James Avon

  Hume-Williams, Wm. Ellis

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Kerry, Earl of

  Sassoon, Sir Philip

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Stanler, Beville

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Dixon, C. H.

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Du Cros, Arthur Philip

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Stewart, Gershom

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North)

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

  Swift, Rigby

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

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

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Falle, B. G.

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

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Fell, Arthur

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Talbot, Lord Edmund

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Mackinder, Halford J.

  Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.)

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine's)

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Malcolm, Ian

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

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Fleming, Valentine

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Touche, George Aleander

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Newman, John R. P.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Nield, Herbert

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Grant, J. A.

  Norton-Griffiths, John

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

  Greene, Walter Raymond

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

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

  Gretton, John

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

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

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

  Guinness, Hon.W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Haddock, George Bahr

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

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Perkins, Walter F.

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

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Younger, Sir George

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)

  Pryce-Jones, Col. E.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Glazebrook and Mr. S. Hill-Wood.

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Rawson, Colonel Richard H.

  Question put, and agreed to.

  Class VIII.
  11. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,789,469, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VIII. of the Estimates for Civil Services, namely:—

  £

  1.

  National Health Insurance, Joint Committee

  26,570

  2.

  National Health Insurance Commission (England) (including a Supplementary sum of £42,500)

  1,482,645

  3.

  National Health Insurance Commission (Wales) (including a Supplementary sum of £28,350)

  122,210

  1800

  £

  4.

  National Health Insurance Commission (Scotland) (including a Supplementary sum of £10,000)

  237,010

  5.

  National Health Insurance Commission (Ireland) (including a Supplementary sum of £18,100)

  158,240

  6.

  Labour Exchanges and Unemployment Insurance

  664,037

  7.

  National Health Insurance Audit Department

  51,757

  8.

  Friendly Societies (Grants-in-Aid)

  47,000

  £2,789,469."

  NAVY ESTIMATES, 1912–13.
  12. "That a sum, not exceeding £28,441,500, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect to the Navy Services, namely:—

  3.

  Medical Establishments and Services

  269,900

  4.

  Martial Law

  3,500

  5.

  Educational Services

  152,500

  6.

  Scientific Services

  72,000

  7.

  Royal Naval Reserves

  426,700

  8.

  Sec. 2. Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc. Materia

  5,076,800

  £

  8.

  Sec. 3. Shipbuilding,-Repairs, Maintenance, etc. Contract Work

  13,055,600

  9.

  Naval Armaments

  3,919,000

  10.

  Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad

  3,515,000

  11.

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  532,000

  12.

  Admiralty Office

  428,500

  Navy, Supplementary

  990,000

  £28,441,500"

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 444; Noes, 39.

  Division No. 174.]

  AYES.

  [11.15 p.m

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Dawes, J. A.

  Agnew, Sir George William

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Allen, A. A. (Dumbartonshire)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Denniss, E. R. B.

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Dickinson, W. H.

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Dixon, Charles Harvey

  Armitage, Robert

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Burn, Colonel C. R.

  Doris, W.

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Bu Cros, Arthur Philip

  Astor, Waldorf

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Duffy, William J.

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

  Butcher, J. G.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Balrd, John Lawrence

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

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

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

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

  Campion, W. R.

  Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Cassel, Felix

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Cator, John

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Cave, George

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

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

  Barnston, Harry

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Falconer, J.

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick B.)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Falle, B. G.

  Barrie, H. T.

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Barton, William

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Fell, Arthur

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

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts. Wilton)

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Clive, Captain Percy Arthur

  Ffrench, Peter

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Fitzgibbon, John

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Fleming, Valentine

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

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

  Bennet-Goldney, Francis

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Bentham, George Jackson

  Cotton, William Francis

  Furness, Stephen

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Bethell, Sir John Henry

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Bigland, Alfred

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Bird, A.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Black, Arthur W.

  Crooks, William

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Boland, John Pius

  Crumley, Patrick

  Glazebrook, Capt. Philip K.

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Cullinan, John

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

  Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Grant, James Augustus

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Greene W. R.

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Locker-Limpson, O. (Ramsey)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Gretton, John

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

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Lundon, T.

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

  Griffith, Ellis Jones

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

  Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

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

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

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

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Guinness, Hon.W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Pryce-Jones, Colonel E.

  Gulland, John William

  McGhee, Richard

  Radford, G. H.

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Hackett, John

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H

  Haddock, George Bahr

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Rawson, Colonel R. H.

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  MacCallum, Sir John M.

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Reddy, M.

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs., Spalding)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augstine)

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Malcolm, Ian

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Manfield, Harry

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

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

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Harwood, George

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Meagher, Michael

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Middlebrook, William

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Hayward, Evan

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  Molloy, M.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Mond, Sir Alfred M.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Henderson, Major H. (Berks)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Rowlands, James

  Henry, Sir Charles S.

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Royds, Edmund

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

  Mooney, John J.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Morgan, George Hay

  Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen)

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Morrell, Philip

  Rutherford, W. (Liverpool, W. Derby)

  Hickman, Colonel T. E.

  Morison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Higham, John Sharp

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Hill, Sir Clement L.

  Morison, Hector

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

  Hills, John Waller

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Muldoon, John

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Hinds, John

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Munro, R.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Hodge, John

  Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C.

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Hohler, G. F.

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Sassoon, sir Philip

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  Neilson, Francis

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C. E.

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Newman, John R. P.

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Tradeston)

  Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford)

  Nicholson, Sir Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Horner, A. L.

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

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

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Nield, Herbert

  Sheehy, David

  Hughes, S. L.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Shortt, Edward

  Hume-Williams, Wm. Ellis

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, E.)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Sw'nsea)

  O'Dowd, John

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Ogden, Fred

  Stanier, Beville

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

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

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney)

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Malley, William

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Keating, Matthew

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

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Kellaway, Frederick George

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

  Stewart, Gershom

  Kelly, Edward

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

  Summers, James Woolley

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Sutherland, John E.

  Kerry, Earl of

  O'Shee, James John

  Swift, Rigby

  Kilbride, Denis

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Taylor, T. C. (Radcliffe)

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S.Molton)

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Terrell, G. (Wilts, N.W.)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Peel, Captain R. F. (Woodbridge)

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

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

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

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts, Mile End)

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Tobin, A. A.

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Touche, G. A.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Phillips, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Toulmin, Sir George

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Pirie, Dunvan V.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  1804

  1805

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

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

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Valentia, Viscount

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas.)

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir T. P.

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Wadsworth, John

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

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

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Wiles, Sir Thomas

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Williams, Llewellyn (Carmarthen)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Ward, Arnold S. (Herts., Watford)

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Younger, Sir George

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

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

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Williamson, Sir Archibald

  Webb, H.

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

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

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

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

  G. Howard and Captain Guest.

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

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  NOES.

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Hancock, John George

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Alden, Percy

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Arnold, Sydney

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

  Snowden, Philip

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Hogge, James Myles

  Sutton, John E.

  Barnes, George N.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Crlcklade)

  Wardle, George J.

  Clough, William

  Lansbury, George

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  De Forest, Baron

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Glanville, Harold James

  Martin, J.

  Parker and Mr. Pointer.

  ARMY ESTIMATES, 1912–13.
  13. "That a sum, not exceeding £10,037,100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Army Services, namely:—

  £

  2.

  Medical Establishment, Pay, etc.

  436,000

  3.

  Special Reserve

  715,000

  5.

  Establishments for Military Education

  142,000

  6.

  Quartering, Transport, and Remounts

  1,624,000

  7.

  Supplies and Clothing

  4,275,000

  8.

  Ordnance Department Establishments and General Stores

  615,000

  9.

  Armaments, Aviation, and Engineer Stores

  1,718,000

  11.

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  72,000

  £

  12.

  War Office

  440,000

  Ordnance Factories

  100

  £10,037,100"

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1912–13.
  14. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,503,730, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1913, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments, namely:—

  £

  1.

  Customs and Excise

  1,457,900

  2.

  Inland Revenue

  1,045,830

  £2,503,730"

  Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 307; Noes, 186.

  Division No. 175.]

  AYES.

  [11.28 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Alden, Percy

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

  Ballour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

  Adkins, Sir W. Ryland D.

  Armitage, Robert

  Baring, Sir Godfrey (Barnstaple)

  Agnew, Sir George William

  Arnold, Sydney

  Barnes, G. N.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Barran, Sir John (Hawick)

  Barton, W.

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Morrell, Philip

  Beale, Sir William Phipson

  Hancock, John George

  Morison, Hector

  Beauchamp, Sir Edward

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Beck, Arthur Cecil

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Muldoon, John

  Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George)

  Hardle, J. Keir

  Munro, R.

  Bentham, G. J.

  Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

  Munro-Ferguson, Rt. Hon. R. C.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

  Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.

  Black, Arthur W.

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

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Boland, John Pius

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

  Needham, Christopher T.

  Booth, Frederick Handel

  Harwood, George

  Neilson, Francis

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Nicholson, Sir Charles (Doncaster)

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Brady, P. J.

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Hayward, Evan

  Nuttall, Harry

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Hazleton, Richard (Galway, N.)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Helme, Sir Norval Watson

  O'Connor, John (Kildare)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Henry, Sir Charles S.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

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

  O'Dowd, John

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Higham, John Sharp

  Ogden, Fred

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Hinds, John

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

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

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Byles, Sir William Pollard

  Hodge, John

  O'Malley, William

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Hogge, James Myles

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

  Cawley, Harold T. (Lancs., Heywood)

  Holmes, Daniel Turner

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  O'Shee, James John

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Hope, John Deans (Haddington)

  O'Sullivan, Timothy

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Clough, William

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Isaacs, Rt. Hon. Sir Rufus

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Jones, Rt.Hon.Sir D.Brynmor (Sw'nsea)

  Pease., Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham)

  Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

  Jones, Edward R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Phillips, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Jones, W. S. Glyn- (Stepney)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Cotton, William Francis

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Joyce, Michael

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Keating, M.

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Crooks, William

  Kellaway, Frederick George

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

  Crumley, Patrick

  Kelly, Edward

  Priestley, Sir Arthur (Grantham)

  Cullinan, J.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

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

  Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Davies, E. William (Eifion)

  King, Joseph

  Radford, G. H.

  Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth)

  Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon,S.Molton)

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Dawes, J. A.

  Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

  Raphael, Sir Herbert H.

  De Forest, Baron

  Lansbury, George

  Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

  Delany, William

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Reddy, Michael

  Devlin, Joseph

  Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

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

  Leach, Charles

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Dillon, John

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lewis John Herbert

  Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

  Doris, William

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Duffy, William J.

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lundon, Thomas

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid)

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Roche, Augustine (Louth)

  Elverston, Sir Harold

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

  McGhee, Richard

  Rowlands, James

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

  Maclean, Donald

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Essex, Richard Walter

  Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Falconer, J.

  MacNeill, John G. S. (Donegal, South)

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

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Macpherson, James Ian

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Samuel, Sir Stuart M. (Whitechapel)

  Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

  McCallum, Sir John M.

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Ffrench, Peter

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir C. E.

  Fitzgibbon, John

  M'Laren, Hon. H. D. (Leics.)

  Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  M'Laren, Hon. F.W.S. (Lincs.,Spalding)

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

  France, G. A.

  Manfield, Harry

  Sheehy, David

  Furness, Stephen

  Markham, Sir Arthur Basil

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Marks, Sir George Croydon

  Shortt, Edward

  George Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Martin, Joseph

  Simon, Sir John Allsebrook

  Gladstone, W. G. C.

  Masterman, Rt. Hon. C. F. G.

  Smith, H. B. (Northampton)

  Glanville, H. J.

  Meagher, Michael

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Snowden, Philip

  Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough)

  Middlebrook, William

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Greenwood, Hamar (Sunderland)

  Molloy, M.

  Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Mond, Sir Alfred

  Summers, James Woolley

  Griffith, Ellis Jones (Anglesey)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke)

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Sutton, John E.

  Gulland, John W.

  Mooney, John J.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Hackett, John

  Morgan, George Hay

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  1808

  1809

  Tennant, Harold John

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

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

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Webb, H.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Worcs., N.)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Toulmin, Sir George

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

  Winfrey, Richard

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glas,)

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Verney, Sir Harry

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Wadsworth, J.

  Wiles, Thomas

  Walsh, Stephen (Lancs., Ince)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Williams, Llewellyn (Carmarthen)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  G. Howard and Captain Guest.

  Wardle, G. J.

  Williamson, Sir A.

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey

  Nield, Herbert

  Amery, L. C. M. S.

  Finlay, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

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

  Ashley, W. W.

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

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

  Astor, Waldorf

  Fleming, Valentine

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Bagot, Lieut.-Colonel J.

  Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead)

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)

  Baird, J. L.

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

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

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

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Glazebrook, Capt. Phillip K.

  Pole-Carew, Sir R.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Pollock, E. M.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Baring, Maj. Hon. Guy V. (Winchester)

  Grant, J. A.

  Pryce-Jones, Col. E. (M'tgom'h B'ghs)

  Barlow, Montague (Salford, South)

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Barnston, Harry

  Gretton, John

  Rawson, Col. R. H.

  Barrie, H. T.

  Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.)

  Rees, Sir J. D.

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

  Guinness, Hon.W.E. (Bury S.Edmunds)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Hall, Fred (Dulwich)

  Royds, Edmund

  Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Rutherford, John (Lancs., Darwen)

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Harris, Henry Percy

  Rutherford, W. (Liverpool, W. Derby)

  Bennett-Goldney, Francis

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Bigland, Alfred

  Herbert, Hon. A. (Somerset, S.)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Bird, A.

  Hewins, William Albert Samuel

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Boscawen, Sir Arthur S. T. Griffith-

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Sassoon, Sir Philip

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hill, Sir Clement

  Scott, Leslie (Liverpool, Exchange)

  Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell

  Hills, J. W.

  Smith, Harold (Warrington)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hill-Wood, Samuel

  Spear, Sir John Ward

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hohler, G F.

  Stanier, Beville

  Burgoyne, A. H.

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Burn, Col. C. R.

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Butcher, J. G.

  Horne, Edgar (Surrey, Guildford)

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Campion, William Robert

  Horner, A. L.

  Stewart, Gershom

  Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Swift, Rigby

  Cassel, Felix

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  Sykes, Alan John (Ches., Knutsford)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Jessell, Captain H. M.

  Sykes, Mark (Hull, Central)

  Cator, John

  Kerry, Earl of

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Cautley, H. S.

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Terrell, George (Wilts, N.W.)

  Cave, George

  Kinlock-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  knight, Capt. E. A.

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North)

  Cecil, Lord R. (Herts, Hitchin)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End)

  Touche, George Alexander

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Clive, Captain Percy Arthur

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Valentia, Viscount

  Clyde, James Avon

  Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury)

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Coates, Major Sir Edward Feetham

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Craig, E. (Ches., Crewe)

  Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

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

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (St Geo.,Han.S.)

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

  Dairymple, Viscount

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Mackinder, Halford J.

  Wolmer, Viscount

  Dickson, Rt Hon. C. S.

  McNeill, Ronald (Kent, St. Augustine)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Dixon, C. H.

  Malcolm, Ian

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Du Cros, Arthur Philip

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

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

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Wright, Henry Fitzherbert

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton)

  Yate, Col. C. E.

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)

  Younger, Sir George

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

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Falle, Bertram Godfray

  Newman, John R. P.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr.

  Fell, Arthur

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  A. Ward and Major Peel.

  Resolutions to be reported upon Wednesday, 31st July.

  Question put, and agreed to.

  NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1910–11.
  Considered in Committee.
  [Mr. WHITLEY in the Chair.]
  Mr. MASTERMANmoved the following Resolutions:—
  I. Whereas it appears by the Navy Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1911, and the statement appended thereto, as follows, namely:—

  (a) That the aggregate expenditure on Navy Services exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated for those Services by a sum of £28,895 10s. 10d.;

  (b) That the aggregate receipts in aid of Navy Services exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated in aid of those Services by a sum of £213,259 12s. 11d.;

  (c) That, as shown in the Schedule hereto appended, the total differences between the Exchequer

  SCHEDULE.

  Number of Vote.

  Navy Services, 1910–11. Votes.

  Differences between Exchequer Grants and Net Expenditure.

  Surpluses.

  Deficits.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  1

  Wages, etc., of Officers, Seamen, and Boys, Coast Guard, and Royal Marines

  31,281

  10

  11

  —

  2

  Victualling and Clothing for the Navy

  —

  18,204

  15

  6

  3

  Medical Establishments and Services

  11,644

  15

  7

  —

  4

  Martial Law

  1,766

  6

  1

  —

  5

  Educational Services

  6,486

  4

  1

  —

  6

  Scientific Services

  —

  1,080

  15

  4

  7

  Royal Naval Reserves

  —

  9,597

  12

  6

  8

  Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc.:

  I. Personnel

  6,858

  5

  5

  —

  II. Matériel

  139,306

  5

  8

  —

  III. Contract Work

  99,824

  17

  8

  —

  9

  Naval Armaments

  —

  36,512

  7

  6

  10

  Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad

  —

  18,260

  14

  9

  11

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  —

  63,485

  6

  2

  12

  Admiralty Office

  —

  4,946

  13

  0

  13

  Half Pay and Retired Pay

  17,735

  19

  7

  —

  14

  Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances

  8,528

  3

  9

  —

  15

  Civil Superannuation, Compensation Allowances, and Gratuities

  14,292

  4

  2

  —

  —

  Amount written off as irrecoverable

  —

  1,272

  6

  1

  Total

  337,724

  12

  11

  153,360

  10

  10

  Add Excess Vote

  100

  0

  0

  —

  337,824

  12

  11

  163,360

  10

  10

  Net Surplus

  £184,464 2 1

  Grants for Navy Services and the net expenditure are as follows, namely:—

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total Surpluses

  337,724

  12

  11

  Total Deficits

  153,360

  10

  10

  Net Surplus

  £184,364

  2

  1

  And whereas by a Vote of Parliament during the present Session (House of Commons Paper, No. 65, of 1912), a further sum of £100 has been granted for the expenditure of the year 1910–11, and the appropriation of additional receipts in aid of such expenditure has been sanctioned to the amount of ·28,795 10s. 10d.
  And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Navy Services as is necessary to make good the said total deficits on other Grants for Navy Services.
  1. That the application of such sums be sanctioned.
  II. Whereas it appears by the Army Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1911, and the statement appended thereto, that the aggregate expenditure on Army Services has not exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated for those Services, but that, as shown in the Schedule hereto appended, the total differences between the Exchequer Grants for Army Services and the net expenditure are as follows:—

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total Surpluses

  329,734

  19

  10

  Total Deficits

  119,126

  8

  8

  Net Surplus

  £210,608

  11

  2

  And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Army Services as is necessary to make good the said total deficits on other Grants foe Army Services.
  2. That the application of such sums be sanctioned.

  SCHEDULE.

  Number of Vote.

  Army Services, 1910–11. Votes.

  Differences between Exchequer Giants and Net Expenditure

  Surpluses.

  Deficits.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  1

  Pay, etc., of the Army

  10,528

  18

  8

  —

  2

  Medical Establishment: Pay, etc.

  4,415

  17

  10

  —

  3

  Special Reserves

  26,477

  6

  8

  —

  4

  Territorial Force

  109,200

  6

  11

  —

  5

  Establishments for Military Education

  2,089

  1

  9

  —

  6

  Quartering, Transport, and Remounts

  12,470

  5

  1

  —

  7

  Supplies and Clothing

  —

  98,235

  4

  8

  8

  Ordnance Department Establishments and General Stores

  —

  13,879

  18

  3

  9

  Armaments and Engineer Stores

  69,570

  11

  11

  —

  10

  Works and Buildings

  80,948

  1

  2

  —

  11

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  5,190

  7

  8

  —

  12

  War Office

  3,502

  1

  0

  —

  13

  Non-effective Charges for Officers, etc.

  3,281

  2

  3

  —

  14

  Non-effective Charges for Men, etc.

  —

  3,231

  10

  2

  15

  Civil Superannuation, Compensation, and Gratuities

  2,060

  18

  11

  —

  —

  Balances irrecoverable and Claims abandoned

  —

  3,779

  15

  7

  Total

  329,734

  19

  10

  119,126

  8

  8

  Net Surplus

  £210,608 11 2

  Resolutions to be reported upon Wednesday.

  WAYS AND MEANS.
  Considered in Committee.
  Resolved, "That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the Service of the year ending on the 31st day
  of March, 1913, the sum of £92,847,342 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]
  Resolution to be reported upon Wednesday.

  PRIVILEGE.
  Lord ROBERT CECIL: Mr. Deputy-Speaker, I wish to take your direction. I desire to submit that the Government in making payments without the authorisation of this House committed a breach of the privileges of this House; and I wish to ask whether it is convenient for me to make that statement to you now or at some future time, because it is necessary to raise this question at the earliest possible moment?
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I can deal with the matter now, if necessary, but I will not count it against him if the hon. Member wishes to defer it until after Questions to-morrow.
  Lord ROBERT CECIL: I think it will be more convenient to defer it until after
  Questions to-morrow. [HON. MEMBERS: "Now."]
  And, it being after Half-past Eleven of the clock, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
  Adjourned at Ten minutes before Twelve o'clock.

NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.
  CHARWOMEN.
  CHARWOMEN.
  Land Values.
  Land Values.
  Increment Value Duty.
  Increment Value Duty.
  Irish Railways (Development Commission).
  Irish Railways (Development Commission).
  Swine Fever.
  Swine Fever.
  Dundalk Board of Guardians.
  Dundalk Board of Guardians.
  Old Age Pensions.
  Old Age Pensions.
  Intermediate Education (Ireland).
  Intermediate Education (Ireland).
  Wexford Labour Troubles (Extra Police).
  Wexford Labour Troubles (Extra Police).
  Law of Perjury (Ireland).
  Law of Perjury (Ireland).
  Labourers' Cottages (Tralee Rural District).
  Labourers' Cottages (Tralee Rural District).
  National School Teachers (Ireland).
  National School Teachers (Ireland).
  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  United Irish League, Portumna.
  United Irish League, Portumna.
  Rosyth Dockyard (Fair-Wages Clause).
  Rosyth Dockyard (Fair-Wages Clause).
  Artificer Engineers.
  Artificer Engineers.
  Seaforth Barracks (Canteen).
  Seaforth Barracks (Canteen).
  Experimental Service Rifle.
  Experimental Service Rifle.
  War Office Clerks.
  War Office Clerks.
  Trinidad (Sugar Crops).
  Trinidad (Sugar Crops).
  New Hebrides.
  New Hebrides.
  Gilbert and Ellice Islands (Labour conditions).
  Gilbert and Ellice Islands (Labour conditions).
  Jam Sahib of Nawanagar.
  Jam Sahib of Nawanagar.
  Tibet (Chinese Troops).
  Tibet (Chinese Troops).
  Liquor and Drugs (British-Indian Empire).
  Liquor and Drugs (British-Indian Empire).
  India Office Clerks (Stock Exchange Settlements).
  India Office Clerks (Stock Exchange Settlements).
  Education Endowments.
  Education Endowments.
  Wandsworth and Brixton Prisons.
  Wandsworth and Brixton Prisons.
  Vivisection (Royal Commission).
  Vivisection (Royal Commission).
  Port of London (Strike).
  Port of London (Strike).
  Forcible Feeding of Prisoners.
  Forcible Feeding of Prisoners.
  Conviction for Assault (Petition).
  Conviction for Assault (Petition).
  Celluloid Manufacture (Fatal Fire in City of London).
  Celluloid Manufacture (Fatal Fire in City of London).
  Police Powers (Public Liberty).
  Police Powers (Public Liberty).
  Workmen's Compensation.
  Workmen's Compensation.
  Lunatics (England and Wales).
  Lunatics (England and Wales).
  Applicants for Naturalisation.
  Applicants for Naturalisation.
  Motor Omnibuses (London).
  Motor Omnibuses (London).
  Sale of Intoxicants (England and Wales).
  Sale of Intoxicants (England and Wales).
  Small-pox Patients, Bradford.
  Small-pox Patients, Bradford.
  Hebden Bridge Railway Accident.
  Hebden Bridge Railway Accident.
  Newport (Salop) Post Office.
  Newport (Salop) Post Office.
  Imperial Wireless Stations.
  Imperial Wireless Stations.
  Sub-Post Offices.
  Sub-Post Offices.
  Post Office (Engineering Department).
  Post Office (Engineering Department).
  Prime Minister's Dublin Speech (Telegraphic Delay).
  Prime Minister's Dublin Speech (Telegraphic Delay).
  Provincial Postmen.
  Provincial Postmen.
  Purley Telephone Exchange.
  Purley Telephone Exchange.
  Penny Postage.
  Penny Postage.
  Registration of Letters and Postal Packets.
  Registration of Letters and Postal Packets.
  Trout (Epizootic Disease).
  Trout (Epizootic Disease).
  Breach of Peace, Kirkcudbright (Release of Prisoner).
  Breach of Peace, Kirkcudbright (Release of Prisoner).
  Teachers' Superannuation (Scotland).
  Teachers' Superannuation (Scotland).
  Sudden Deaths (Scotland).
  Sudden Deaths (Scotland).
BARONY OF FURNIVALL.
Petition of Etheldreda Mary Baroness Petre, widow and relict of Bernard Henry Philip, fourteenth Baron Petre of Writtle in the County of Essex, deceased, as mother and next friend of Mary Frances Katherine Petre, commonly called the Honourable Mary Frances Katherine Petre, an infant, and also of the said Etheldreda Mary Baroness Petre, and of Oswald Henry Philip Turville-Petre, of Bosworth Hall, in the County of Leicester, Esquire, and of Joseph Francis Lescher, of Boyles Court, in the County of Essex, Esquire, as Guardians and Trustees of the said Mary Frances Katherine Petre, for leave to lodge their printed case; read, and ordered as prayed.
NORTH KILLINGHOLME (ADMIRALTY PIER) BILL. [H.L.]
Committed for To-morrow.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENTS) BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.

METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL.
GLASGOW CORPORATION (WATER) BILL.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL.
FYLDE WATER BOARD BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

GLASGOW BOUNDARIES BILL.
Bill read 3a, with the Amendments.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE): I think I ought to explain that there is a further Amendment in addition to the Amendments of which notice has been given. It comes from the Inland Revenue, and as it only reached the promoters at 1.30 p.m. to-day it has been quite impossible for them to give proper notice if the Bill was to be read a third time to-clay. The proper course would be to postpone the Third Reading in order that the usual notice might be given. This, however, is an agreed Amendment between Somerset House and the promoters,
732
and it affects nobody except Somerset House and the promoters. The result of delaying the Bill would be to cause the promoters to lose a valuable twenty-four hours in getting their Amendments through the other House, and I therefore suggest that your Lordships would do well not to insist on the strict rigidity of the rules of the House on this occasion but allow this Amendment to be inserted.
Further Amendments made: Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

KENT AND BELA FISHERIES PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 133.)

ARBROATH CORPORATION GAS ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
BISHOP'S DIVORCE BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.

LONDON TRUST COMPANY BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with Amendments: The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.

EXE FISHERIES PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (GAS) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 7) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
MIDLAND RAILWAY BILL.
BIRMINGHAM CORPORATION BILL.
ASHBORNE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (GAS) BILL.
BARRY RAILWAY BILL.
EDGWARE AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY BILL.
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
Moved, That the Order made on the 24th day of April, last "That no Provisional Order Confirmation Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after Thursday the 4th day of July next" be dispensed with, and that the Bill be now read 2a (The Lord Granard) (E. Granard); agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed for To-morrow.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 14) BILL.
Moved, That the Order made on the 24th day of April last, "That no Provisional Order Confirmation Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after Thursday the 4th day of July next" be dispensed with, and that the Bill be now read 2a (The Viscount Allendale); agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed for To-morrow.

GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) BILL. [H.L.]
PIER AND HARBOUR ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 4) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.

PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 1) BILL.
SEA FISHERIES (LYNN) PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

CLYDE VALLEY ELECTRICAL POWER ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
Read 2a (according to Order), and (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899) deemed to have been reported from the Committee, and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

PROTECTION OF ANIMALS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD SAYE AND SELE: My Lords, it will be in your Lordships' recollection that about this time last year a Bill was brought up to this House and eventually became law for the consolidation and amendment of enactments relating to this subject. Scotland, however, was omitted from that Bill owing to the difference of procedure in vogue in that country. The Bill to which I am now asking your Lordships to give a Second Reading is almost a facsimile of the Act for England, and therefore I do not think it will be necessary to occupy much time in describing it. There are, however, one or two points in respect of which this Bill is different from the English Act. Clause 4 not only provides for compensation for damage done by cruelty to an animal, but also provides the machinery for collecting it, and there is further on in the clause a provision that a person shall not be ordered to pay arty sum as compensation under this clause unless he has had reasonable notice of the application to be made by the person aggrieved, including notice of the amount claimed. Clause embraces the whole of the knackers legislation for Scotland, and imposes a penalty of £5 for keeping or using any building or place as a knacker's yard without first taking out a licence for that purpose. Clause 7 gives a wider defence than in the English Act to any person putting down poisoned grain and flesh. In Clause 9 the words "or any snare" are added after "spring trap," and it becomes necessary under this clause for any one who sets a spring trap or any snare to inspect or cause some competent person to inspect the trap or snare at least once every day between sunrise and sunset. Clause 12 differs slightly from the English Act in that it gives further protection to the person against whom proceedings are taken for an act of cruelty, he not being the owner; and it provides that reasonable notice should be given to him. With those few exceptions this Bill is exactly similar to the English Act which your Lordships passed into law last year. It has come from another place without any opposition being taken to it, and I ask your Lordships to give it a Second Reading today.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Saye and Sele.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES.
First Report from the Select Committee considered (according to Order), and agreed to.

FACTORY AND WORKSHOP (No. 2) BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, in moving that this Bill be read a third time I should like to ask the noble Lord who represents the Home Office whether he has had an opportunity of considering the point winch was under discussion on the last occasion when the Bill was before us. It arose on an Amendment of mine, which I am going to move again directly, to include "other clerical work" in the schedule. On that occasion I asked the noble Lord whether the Government would accept the Amendment, or, in the alternative, whether they would consent to a Departmental inquiry on the point. If your Lordships desired, I could proceed to state the case in favour of the Amendment in more detail. But if I have an assurance from the noble Lord that he is willing to accept the Amendment or will grant a Departmental inquiry, or an inquiry in any form which the Home Office wish, then I would not trouble your Lordships with a speech.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
THE PAYMASTER-GENERAL (LORD STRACHIE): As regards what the noble Marquess has just said, I have to state that while not committing themselves to it in any way the Government will not oppose the noble Marquess's Amendment.
On Question, Bill read 3a.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: As the Government do not oppose my Amendment, I will not trouble your Lordships with a speech, but will content myself with simply moving it.
Amendment moved—
Schedule, page 4, line 29, after ("typewriting") insert ("and other clerical work").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to: Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

UNIFORM TIME (IRELAND) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.

SANITARY SERVICE OF INDIA.
VISCOUNT MIDLETON VISCOUNT MIDLETON rose to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can make any statement as to the reform in the Sanitary Service of India which has recently been under consideration; what will be the position of the head of the Sanitary Service under the new conditions; and when he will be in a position to lay Papers on the subject.
The noble Viscount said: My Lords, in asking the Secretary of State for India the Question which stands in my name, I do not propose to occupy your Lordships' time for more than a minute or two. It would be impossible, of course, to speak on the subject of sanitation in India without speaking at considerable length. The subject is a very difficult one, and I am afraid I must confess that I think it is one in which there are considerable arrears of administration to be made up. There is one point on which I specially hope that the Secretary of State may be able to reassure us, and that is with regard to the position of the head of the Sanitary Department in India. As your Lordships are aware, for many years the head of the Army Medical Department was also head of the Sanitary Service in India. The duties now discharged by the head of the Army Medical Corps are of a very wide character, and the immense improvement in the health of the troops is largely due to the measures which have been taken by successive heads of the Army Medical Department; but it has long been realised that it is beyond the power of any human being to discharge all these duties with regard to nearly 200,000 troops and at the same time carry on the whole Sanitary Service throughout India. It is therefore to be hoped that the change which was made by which the head of the Sanitary Department obtained an autonomy of his own may be restored. In recent years the head of the Sanitary Service in India has been placed for administrative duties under the Education Department of all others, and I confess that I think the time has come when that arrangement, which is difficult to understand on the face of it, should be modified, and when a status should be given to the head of the Sanitary Department equivalent to the vast duties which he has to discharge. I do not move for Papers, but I hope that the noble Marquess may be able to tell us that we may hope to see Papers before long on the subject.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE): My Lords, I Will deal somewhat briefly on this occasion with the matter raised by the noble Viscount, but I shall be able, I hope, to satisfy him to some extent by saving that we hope soon to lay tolerably full Papers on this subject, and it is possible that when the noble Viscount has read them he may desire to go somewhat more fully into this interesting and important question of the Sanitary Service of India. Your Lordships will remember that one of the Directors or Inspectors-General whose office it was proposed at one time to abolish was the Inspector-General of Sanitation. The noble Earl who is not now in the House, Lord Curzon, included this officer in the remonstrance which he addressed to us last year in respect to the proposed abolition, and I was able—I think it was at the beginning of November last year—to reassure the noble Earl and those who agreed with him that we did not propose to carry out the complete amalgamation of sanitation with the Indian Medical Service. I accordingly addressed a Despatch to India not long before I left for that country last autumn, in which I stated that we had decided to retain an independent Sanitary Commissioner, but that his precise relations with the Director-General of the Indian Medical Service would have to be a matter for future consideration.
It may be remembered that one of the particular objections taken to the system as it has existed for the last five or six years was that it was found that more and more divorce was beginning to exist between the research side and the clinical side of the Sanitary and Medical Service. Many of the younger medical officers who were employed for research purposes found that they were losing touch with an important part of their duties in having little or no opportunity of watching cases. We have now reached a conclusion which I hope the noble Viscount will consider to be a satisfactory one. The Sanitary Commissioner will be in future relieved from a great body of office work which fell upon him when he was the independent head of a separate Department, and will have, therefore, more time for touring and for inspection in different parts of India. The research and bacteriological side, which was formerly under the Sanitary
738
Commissioner, will now be placed under the direct authority of the Medical Director-General, but on all purely technical sanitary matters the Sanitary Commissioner will be not a subordinate but an independent officer. He will be able to correspond on such subjects directly either with the Provincial Governments or with the Government of India itself; but on matters of administration, questions of appointments and of personnel, he will be in the position, as it were, of chief of the staff to the Director-General of the Medical Service. We believe that this compromise between the complete abolition of the post of Sanitary Commissioner and its retention as a purely independent post is one which will be found best to suit the peculiarities of Indian conditions.
It is not possible, in our opinion, altogether to divorce the Medical from the Sanitary Service in India, however possible or desirable it may be to do it elsewhere. The Local Governments have naturally to retain a considerable degree of independence in sanitary matters. In the first place, it is they who find practically all tine money. And then in India there is the fact, which is not found, at any rate to the same extent, elsewhere, that a close association exists between sanitation and politics. As noble Lords who know India well are aware, it is possible by unwise or excessive insistence upon sanitary improvements to run counter to deep-seated beliefs and prejudices of the population in many parts of the country, and on such subjects it may be presumed that the Local Government is the best guide that could be found. Consequently there will remain a great deal of local control, and for many purposes the Inspector-General will therefore not be an officer who gives orders so much as an inspecting and advising official, but his position, as will be clear from what I have already said, will be one of no little importance and dignity. On this subject I shall hope to be able to submit Papers before very long, and also I hope at the same time further Papers dealing with the important question of the local sanitary services.
After a great deal of discussion between the Government of India and the Local Government; a scheme has been prepared which was submitted to us at the India Office this year and which has been

739
approved. It embodies some of the recommendations of the Plague Committee of 1898, and it also deals with some of the recommendations which were made to the noble Viscount opposite when he was Secretary of State by the College of Physicians, if I remember rightly in the year 1905, when he received a deputation on the subject. The object is to strengthen, if possible, the local sanitary staffs. It is proposed to add, among superior officers, nine Deputy Commissioners of Sanitation, and for those posts Indians will be eligible as well as Europeans. It is proposed also to strengthen and enlarge the sanitary staffs of big towns. It is hoped that all the more considerable towns in India in clue course will have a Health Department presided over by a really capable officer, which will place them in these matters on something of the same level as the great urban communities in this country and in other countries in Europe. It will, I am sure, have occurred to the noble Viscount that these things will cost money and that provincial funds are not easily forthcoming even for such excellent objects as these. Therefore it has been arranged that the Government of India will come forward with money to a certain extent pro rata to that which is locally provided, and in that way, as I should hope, no little improvement will be possible.
The Papers, I think, will also touch on the malarial conferences which have been held, one in Bombay and also others, for dealing with this terrible scourge which still devastates India to so great an extent, and, as I hope, for continuing to educate the people of India in the methods of combating the pests through which malaria is spread. As noble Lords are aware, there are many facts in Indian conditions which make the destruction of the malarial mosquito a greater difficulty in India than it has been found to be in some other parts of the world, such as, for instance, in the West Indies or in West Africa. On the other hand, there have been some notable successes in Bombay and other places, and it may be trusted in time that steps will be taken all over India to diminish to a great extent, although it may not be possible quite to eradicate, this painful and disabling disease of malaria.
VISCOUNT MIDLETON: I am much obliged to the noble Marquess for his
740
statement. Might I ask when we may hope to have the Papers in our hands, and also whether there will be any sanitary representative on the Commission of which we heard last week appointed for the examination of the Civil establishments in India?
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: As regards the first question, I am afraid I am not able to give the noble Viscount the precise date for the laying of Papers, but it will not be long deferred. We have at command all the necessary Papers, and it is therefore only a question of obtaining the final agreement of the Government of India and the actual selection of the Papers. I am not sure that I quite apprehend the full meaning of the noble Viscount's second question. I understood him to be referring to the Royal Commission, the appointment of which has been approved by His Majesty's Government, in relation to the Indian public services. It was on that Commission, I think, that the noble Viscount asked whether a sanitary expert would be placed.
VISCOUNT MIDLETON: I did not mean to imply a sanitary expert necessarily, but a medical or sanitary representative.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I am not in a position to give the names at this moment, but I think the noble Viscount will find that the arrangements by which the Commission will work and the manner in which it will be formed for the purpose of taking evidence in relation to particular subjects will meet the point he has raised.

LOCAL AUTONOMY IN INDIA.
LORD INCHCAPE LORD INCHCAPE rose to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the alleged differences in statements made by members of His Majesty's Government with regard to the Government of India's Despatch of August 25, 1911, on the subject of the changes announced at the Delhi Durbar.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, it is within the knowledge of your Lordships that some difference of opinion appears to exist as to the views expressed by a member of the Government in another place and by the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for India in this House in regard to the

741
Despatch of the Government of India of August 25 last. The subject has been mentioned, I think, in your Lordships' House. It has also been frequently referred to in the Press not only in this country but in India, and I venture to submit that if the noble Marquess has no objection it might be convenient if he would give your Lordships a statement as to what the views of His Majesty's Government on that Despatch really are.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, I fear that I may appear to be taking up too large a portion of this afternoon's sitting, but nobody, I am sure, will say that too large a portion is being given or could be given to Indian affairs. The particular Question put by my noble friend deals with a subject which has become, unexpectedly to many of us, of no little importance as a subject of discussion both here and very widely in India itself. The whole matter arises out of the third paragraph of the Despatch which the Government of India wrote to me in reference to the Delhi change—the Despatch which, with my reply to it, was published as a White Paper on December 12 of last year. About that Despatch and subsequent allusions to it and comments upon the particular paragraph a series of Legends has grown up to which my noble friend has drawn attention in his Question.
The legends have taken some such form as this. In the first place, the Government of India is supposed in that third paragraph of its Despatch to have pointed to what is known in India as swaraj, self-government or home rule for India, as the aim and object of the policy of which the change of capital formed a part. The matter was alluded to in this House on February 22, and the legend proceeded that I had endeavoured, apparently without much success, to put a gloss upon the Despatch and altogether to minimise its meaning. The third chapter of the legend was that a few days later the Under-Secretary in my Office, Mr. Montagu, had made a speech at Cambridge in which he threw over my interpretation of the Despatch and reiterated the reading of it which the public had already ascribed to the Government of India's words, and that in speaking again in the House of Commons on April 22 Mr. Montagu repeated the same performance. Then on June 24 Lord Curzon
742
alluded to the matter in this House, and my reply was stated, according to the legend, to have represented a second inadequate attempt to misinterpret the views of the Government of India. The whole of this legend is absolutely baseless. There has never been any difference in meaning or intention between the Government of India and myself, between Mr. Montagu and myself, or between Mr. Montagu and the Government of India. As regards Mr. Montagu, so little did I conceive on reading his excellent speech at Cambridge that he had said or desired to say anything different from what I had said here that. I never even called his attention to the particular passage in his speech, which, of course, I should have done if I had placed any such interpretation upon it.
The Government of India are of opinion that this misinterpretation or, as it has undoubtedly been in some cases, misrepresentation of our meaning is due to their use of the word "autonomy" in their Despatch. The actual passage is this—
"The only possible solution of the difficulty would appear to be gradually to give the Provinces a larger measure of self-government, until at last India would consist of a number of administrations, autonomous in all provincial affairs, with the Government of India above them all and possessing power to interfere in cases of misgovernment, but ordinarily restricting their functions to matters of Imperial concern."
The word "autonomous" possesses four syllables, and may therefore be regarded as comparatively unintelligible. I remember a story of the late Lord Sherbrooke, who at some period, either when he was residing at Oxford or later when he was in Parliament, came into collision with a corporation or other local authority, who addressed him a letter of severe remonstrance. Mr. Lowe, as he then was, as I have heard wrote them a long reply couched entirely in words of one syllable. It is fair, I think, to assume that his main and not uncharacteristic object was to exhibit by that means his opinion of the intellectual standard of his correspondents, but the result probably also was to make his meaning to them entirely clear. It may be that the rise of the word "autonomy" has caused some of this confusion.
But the opinion of the Government of India, which I entirely share, is that British policy in India should have three

743
objects in view. The first object, which we believe will be assisted by our recent policy as explained in this paragraph in the Despatch, is, where possible, to devolve upon local and provincial Governments as many of the functions of government as can safely be entrusted to them. The second object of British rule in India should be, and is, to employ as many Indians in the public service as can reasonably be employed there. The third object is to combine the pursuit of the two first with the maintenance and permanence of British rule in India, because we believe that the maintenance and perpetual continuance of British rule in India is the best way of securing the happiness of the Indian people. There is, of course, some difference of opinion between various persons as to the extent to which provincial devolution or autonomy is possible. Even in the ranks of the Civil Service in India you will find men who by a rough analogy from the United States would be called Republicans, and other men who would be called Democrats—men, that is to say, who in the one instance believe in the predominance of the Central Government, and who in the other case believe in the importance of government by local divisions—and there is room, of course, for doubt or difference of opinion as to what may be meant by the words "local autonomy." On the last occasion when we were mentioning this matter I pointed out that Lord Curzon had spoken of provincial autonomy in matters of finance. We may be quite sure that he did not mean, when holding out the prospect of provincial autonomy, that the Provinces ought to be allowed to raise as much revenue as they pleased in any way they pleased and to spend it as they pleased. What the then Viceroy obviously meant was that a larger share of public expenditure should be left to local collection and to local expenditure on a defined principle; and therefore when we talk in this connection again of provincial autonomy it is reasonable to suppose that certain limits, which need not be narrow or tightly drawn, are intended to exist as between the Provinces and the Central Government.
Then there has been, I think, a second misunderstanding, this time founded on a monosyllable—that is, in the use of the word "goal." This is confusing the lines on which the Government of India desires to work—that is to say, the road along which
744
the Government of India desires to travel, with a supposed or intended termination of that road at which an entirely new form of Government would be found to exist—for there is, I venture to lay down clearly, no final and permanent condition which the Government of India ought to have in view. It cannot have in view what some Indians describe as swaraj, and therefore although it desires to advance along the road of including in the government of India as many of the native inhabitants of India as is possible it does not speak, and I do not believe it will ever speak, of a final goal which it desires to reach. I do not know whether any of your Lordships have ever read the observations of a man who was probably the most thoughtful and the best informed of all the unofficial writers about India in the last half century—I mean the late Mr. Meredith Townshend. He took a pessimistic view of this very question which we are discussing to-day. He founded himself on a belief that England was losing the power of governing other races. He believed that Englishmen were beginning to doubt whether they had a moral right to rule anybody, rather than thinking of ruling justly. He believed that in the ultimate future all the offices of India would be handed over to Indians, with the final result, in his words, that—
"India will re-emerge as she was, shortly to be reduced to the condition in which we found her."
He believed that the distinct genius of the two Continents, Europe and Asia, forbade any real union between them, and he held that the uneffaceable difference in the morale of Asia from that of Europe made the genuine assimilation of Western ideas by Asia altogether impossible. We need not attempt to dive so deep into the future, and even if we do we need not adopt so pessimistic a form of prophecy as that in which Mr. Meredith Townshend indulged.
It has to be borne in mind, as I mentioned the last time I touched on this subject, that the dream which some Indians love to hold—and, for all I know, some Englishmen cherish it too—is a dream of a form of complete self-government for India within the British Empire. I repeat categorically what I said last time, that there is nothing whatever in the teachings of history so far as I know them, or in the present conditions of the world so far as I

745
understand them, which makes the realisation of such a dream even remotely probable. We have tried the experiment of a worldwide Empire of members of our own race. All the chapters in that experiment have not been felicitous. One broke down in 1776, when the American Colonies declared for independence. Since then we have learned some wisdom. We have succeeded in weaving into the Empire the French of Canada and the Dutch of South Africa. Now in an Empire which includes both those different European races we are trying to face and to solve the tremendous problems of general imperial defence and of giving to the component parts of the Empire some share in the shaping of Imperial policy. Can anybody conceive any similar solution of imperial problems for hundreds of millions of men of different races and all of absolutely different races from our own?
Is it conceivable that at any time an Indian Empire could exist on the lines, say, of Australia or of New Zealand, with no British officials, no British troops, no tie of creed or of blood which takes the place of material bonds? I am far from saying that the idea of such an Indian Dominion, cherished by many high-minded men whom I respect, is an ignoble idea, or that those who hold it ought to be described as in any way disloyal. There are some such who believe that it is possible to secure in India the continual presence, the continual influence, and the continual service of men of British blood with no prospect of any violent rupture between the two races and the different countries. To me that is a world as remote as any Atlantis or Erewhon that ever was thought of by the ingenious brain of an imaginative writer. I believe that on the lines which I laid down as being those on which the Government of India ought to work and desires to work there is ample scope both for service and for distinction for men of Indian birth and of the different races. I see wide fields, fields which will grow wider still, for the full play and exercise of the remarkable and special qualities of Indian intellect. It is true I can imagine that there are gifted and most estimable men who may be loth to abandon the idea that either they or somebody like them in future years may be Prime Minister of an Indian Dominion or Commander-in-Chief of an Indian Army. But I venture to think that it is only those who think
746
less of service and more of distinction who would lose heart if they braced themselves altogether to set aside this vision and were willing to settle down to more co-operation and closer co-operation with this Western race, to which they can teach much and from which they can learn much—cooperation for time moral and material bettering of the country to which they are so deeply attached and of which we are so proud to be the governors.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I doubt whether when we came down to the House this afternoon any of us anticipated that we should have had the pleasure of listening to so important a deliverance as that which has just been uttered by the noble Marquess. It was a deliverance which dealt at some length, not only with the principles upon which the Government of India should be administered, but the principles upon which the affairs of the whole British Empire might be conducted in the future. I hope the noble Marquess will not think me a little uncharitable if I suggest that his speech showed a slight undercurrent of uneasiness as to the effect produced upon the public mind both in India and in this country, in the first place by the memorable paragraph in the Government of India's Despatch which he quoted, and next by the interpretation placed upon it by the noble Marquess's Under-Secretary.
Let me once again remind your Lordships of the terms in which the Despatch was couched. It was therein explained that the ultimate solution to which His Majesty's Government looked forward was to be one under which India would—
"consist of a number of administrations, autonomous in all provincial affairs, with the Government of India above them all and possessing power to interfere in cases of misgovernment, but ordinarily restricting their functions to matters of Imperial concern."
I venture to suggest to your Lordships that that paragraph describes a condition of things wholly different from and inconsistent with the Government of India as we know it at present and as we are likely to know it for a long time to come. But the noble Marquess explained that the Despatch was merely intended to indicate what he called the "trend and tendency" of things in India. He evidently preferred that the

747
Despatch should be taken as pointing to a somewhat remote future. But that was not the language of Mr. Montagu. Mr. Montagu spoke of the "goal towards which His Majesty's Government proposed to travel," and then he used these remarkable words—
"At last, and not too soon, a Viceroy has had the courage to state the trend of British policy in India and the lines on which we propose to advance."
It was clearly suggested by Mr. Montagu that this was a new departure, something which had not yet been dreamed of by any Government either in India or in this country. In another speech he said the Government were there—
"to develop India on a plan which had been thought out by those who had been advising the Secretary of State."
Those are words which did not point merely to the trend of the policy observed towards India at the present time. They pointed to some new conception of Government which had been elaborated by the present Government of India and by His Majesty's present advisers. The noble Marquess will not have forgotten the manner in which these announcements were received in India. My noble friend Lord Curzon, when he last dealt with the subject in this House, quoted the comments of the Indian Press. The Indian Press unquestionably took this announcement as indicating a new departure, not a mere following of a gradual path of development, but something new which had not yet been dreamed of and which was being promulgated to the people of India in connection with His Majesty's visit to that country. The noble Marquess has endeavoured to reconcile all these inconsistent declarations, and he gave us at the beginning of his speech the broad outline of the policy which in his opinion should be followed in dealing with the affairs of India. I am bound to say that so far as I was able to follow the noble Marquess's statement I heard nothing in it which at all shocks my feelings or indicates that there is in contemplation any very abrupt departure from the policy to which we, have been used in the past.
I gathered—the noble Marquess will correct me if I am wrong—that these were the three cardinal points of the policy which he and his colleagues desire to advocate in dealing with the Indian Empire.
748
He suggests that we should devolve on the Local Governments as many functions as can be safely entrusted to them. I think that has been very much the policy of the Government of India in the past. The whole question, of course, is what functions can you safely devolve on the Local Governments, and as to that there may, of course, be differences of opinion. The noble Marquess's second point was that we should employ as many natives as could be reasonably employed in the public services. The noble Marquess knows what an immense number of natives are already employed, some of them in very responsible positions, in the public services in India, and what an infinitesimally small minority of public servants in India are of British origin. It has always been the desire of successive Governments to recognise merit amongst Indian servants of the Crown and to advance them so far as that could be safely done consistently with the public interest.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I have no reason to suppose that the noble Marquess does not realise that I meant that in my opinion both those processes might continue to increase to a considerable extent.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: Certainly, we all of us realise that there must be a gradual broadening of these concessions. The noble Marquess's third point was that we should see to the permanent maintenance of British rule in India. That, I take it, is a proposition which no one will controvert, and which no Government of India in the past has ever allowed to be called in question. All those seem to me, if I may say so, sound and salutary principles, and really everything must depend upon the tact and the patience, and, above all, the caution, with which these principles are applied. I do not think I am wrong in gathering that, so far in, the noble Marquess is concerned, those principles will be applied with proper caution. I am glad that he has made his statement to the House, because I think some statement was necessary in order to dissipate the apprehensions and misgivings which, beyond all question, were created both by the terms of the Despatch and by some of the official comments that were made upon it.
LORD COURTNEY OF PENWITH: My Lords, we are, I think, in the presence of a very great problem and very deep specula-

749
tions as to the future, and I think it is necessary to be extremely cautious in entering into any part of the discussion which has been raised by the Question addressed to the noble Marquess by my noble friend below the Gangway (Lord Inchcape). I would fain leave it alone, but I confess I am under the impression that one word at least should be added—a word of deprecation almost of the discussion itself. An attempt has been made to solve a great mystery. That mystery had better be left to solve itself, to work itself out in a fashion as to which I venture to think no member of your Lordships' House and no one outside, however deeply engaged in the affairs of Government, however profoundly attentive to the issues of the present time and the movement of events here and elsewhere, is competent to pronounce a final judgment.
This discussion has been raised because of three apparently different expressions of opinion on the part of the Government in India and the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary at home. The noble Marquess the Secretary of State now tells us that the Government in India have never differed from himself, that he has never differed from the Under-Secretary, and that the Under-Secretary has never differed from the Government in India. Then he proceeded to describe what was the one thing on which they are agreed. I confess that the expressions of the three authorities do show such a dissimilarity that it, is very difficult to make out absolute agreement at the bottom; and the attempt to describe what is the nature of their agreement and what is the future on which the efforts of those who direct the government of India are bent does not impress upon me at all events a feeling that it can be accepted as final or exhaustive. It has been supposed apparently that the local autonomy which it was suggested in the famous Despatch might be given to Provincial Governments meant entire self-government by something like representative bodies brought into existence as representing the different inhabitants of the particular Province. The phrase does not necessarily mean that. It only necessarily means a restricted independence of the Provincial Government in ordinary matters of local concern.
But the language of the Under-Secretary did describe a state of things in which a
750
greater measure of independence might be reached, and the Secretary of State proceeded here to deprecate the suggestion that there could ever be complete independence of British control in India. The noble Marquess affirmed, not only that that could not be foreseen or could not be aimed at, but that the perpetual maintenance of British control is the thing to which all must look forward. I do not see myself the end of that control; I do net see what would take its place; but I venture to deprecate the suggestion that it could not come to an end and that some other order might not arise. May we not be content with the further carrying on of the process of development of which Lord Lansdowne, has spoken, the further enlistment of natives in the government of the country, and the further advance of authority within India itself without speculating on the complete and entire withdrawal of British government, still less British influence, from India? "One step is enough for me" was the utterance of a great and wise man, and it seems to me that in this matter that utterance might be appropriated by tire Government. I do not think I ant violating any confidence when I recall that only the year before last a very distinguished Indian servant, one universally honoured but who has passed away, speaking on the subject of the future said to me—
"It is not impossible that the twentieth century may see the complete withdrawal of Europe from Asia";
and in view of what has happened, in view of the extraordinary revivification of Japan and in view of what is going on in China and what may happen there, it is surely unwise to put the limit of impossibility on the development that may occur in India.
It is very difficult to conceive added to the vision of the union of the self-governing Dominions and the home country the vision of a self-governed India participating in that Imperial union. But with respect to all this I am only impressing on your Lordships the suggestion that, however comfortable it may be to ourselves to attempt to dismiss these speculations, we cannot get rid of them. They will be worked out in some fashion probably independently; and it is enough for the moment, at least, if we persevere with what has been the wise policy for some time past

751
—a policy which received considerably freer development under Lord Morley as Secretary of State, and which apparently is entering upon a new stage and another length of road under the operation of the Despatch which accompanied the ceremonial at Delhi and the changes then brought about. I repeat that it is unwise to predict what may or may not be the final result. Let Indian dreamers dream, if they will, a dream which it appears to me can do us no harm. Let us persevere, as is our duty, in doing all we can for the better government of India and making British influence as authoritative, as influential, as it can possibly be through its own merits, and then we may leave the future, whether it be dim or distant or whether it be near, where it is—on the knees of the gods, beyond our power to do anything more than slightly to influence its course.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: May I say one word in explanation, as I think it is possible that my noble friend behind me (Lord Courtney) may have misunderstood my object in saying what I did. It was no desire of mine and no part of my intention to indulge in positive prophecy about the ultimate future of India. It was, indeed, less my object to indicate what our policy is than what it is not. My noble friend may not be aware to what an extent it has been assumed that the present Administration in India is actively pursuing a policy which is intended to end in self-government; and though I quarrel with no man, Indian or other, for the dreams in which he may indulge, I strongly object if my friends and I are stated as sharing those dreams when we do not share them. It is, of course, quite true, as my noble friend has said, that the future remains on the knees of the gods, and it is unwise to attempt to look too far forward. The writer whom I have already quoted, Mr. Meredith Townshend, said somewhere that Asia, which survived the Greek and the Roman, would also survive the Teuton and the Slay. I have no desire, I can assure my noble friend, to engage in any kind of prophecy of the ultimate future; but I did think it desirable, in replying to my noble friend who raised this question, to state clearly what is not our view, in order that our aims and intentions in making, as I hope we shall continue to make, advances in the direction with which my noble friend has sympathised may not be misunderstood.

PUBLIC OFFICES (SITES) BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Earl Beauchamp.)
THE EARL OF MEATH: Before your Lordships go into Committee on this Bill, I desire to ask His Majesty's Government whether, in the building operations which they propose to undertake on Whitehall Gardens, there is any danger of so diminishing the amount of open space lying between Whitehall Gardens and the Thames that some future Government or some future London County Council will find it very difficult indeed to extend the public gardens which are now upon the Embankment, and which add so much to the beauty of our metropolis and to the health and happiness of the people.
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (EARL BEAUCHAMP): I think I can reassure the noble Earl on the point he has raised. This Bill was fully considered by a Committee in another place and here, and every opportunity has been given to those interested in open spaces to make any appearance they desired before the House of Commons Committee as well as before the Committee of your Lordships' House. The provisions which were inserted in the Bill in the House of Commons have, I think, in every way satisfied those who were anxious in regard to this matter. I may tell the noble Earl that we are not allowed under the Bill to go beyond a certain line which is even not so far forward as a continuation of the line of Whitehall Court. Therefore there will always be in front of the new buildings room for a garden quite as large as that which is now there, and to which the noble Earl referred in terms of appreciation with which I should like to associate myself.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly.
[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
Bill reported without amendment, and to be read 3a To-morrow.

RIFLES FOR NAVY PRACTICE.
VISCOUNT MIDLETON: I beg to ask the noble Lord who represents the War Office the Question standing in my name on the Paper—namely, whether it is a fact that four of the recently converted rifles out of forty recently supplied to the Navy for practice have had the breech blown out; whether the ammunition employed has been withdrawn; and whether he can state the amount of this ammunition which is at present in store.
LORD HERSCHELL: In answer to the noble Viscount I have to state that it is a fact that about 190 rifles were lent by the War Office to the Admiralty for use at Bisley, but these rifles were not of the recently-converted type but were the long charger loading type such as are at present in use by the Territorial Force. According to the information supplied by the Admiralty, no breeches of these rifles were "blown out"; but—and this is probably the foundation for the noble Viscount's Question—four bolt heads broke off on extraction after the rifles had been fired. The ammunition which was used was the ordinary Mark VI., which, of course, is the only ammunition that could be used in these
754
particular rifles owing to the sighting, and there is no reason to suppose that the breaking of the bolt heads was in any way connected with the ammunition which was used. The rifles will, I may say, be thoroughly examined before they are again issued for use.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The reply of the noble Lord is very interesting, but even the bolt heads of rifles do not burst for no reason at all. I suppose that, under the ordinary practice which prevails in the Service, a board of officers has sat to find out the cause of the breaking. It would be interesting if the noble Lord could tell us the cause.
LORD HERSCHELL: I am not sure whether the rifles have even come back yet. When they do the matter will certainly be examined into. But the point is that there is no reason for supposing that there is any connection between the breaking of the bolt head and the ammunition.
House adjourned at Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.