Sitting of 14 November 1912

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.
NEW WRIT.
For the Borough of Bolton, in the room of George Harwood, Esquire, deceased.—[Mr. Illingworth.]
SHOPS ACT, 1912.
Copy presented of Order made by the Secretary for Scotland, dated 28th October, 1912, in terms of Section 4 of The Shops Act, 1912, affecting certain Classes of Shops in the Burgh of Falkirk [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
INDIA OFFICE (SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES).
Address for "Return showing the Superannuation and Retired Allowances relating to the India Office payable on the 31st day of March, 1912."—[Mr. MacCallum Scott.]
NEW MEMBER SWORN.
Sir Gilbert Alan Hamilton Wills, baronet, for the Borough of Taunton.

ESTABLISHED CHURCH (WALES) BILL.
Petitions were presented praying the House not to pass into law the Established Church (Wales) Bill by—
Mr. Newman (21 petitions) from Middlesex.
Mr. Meysey-Thompson (15 petitions) from Staffordshire.
Lord Robert Cecil, from Hertfordshire.
Viscount Valentia.
Mr. Hicks Beach.
Mr. Hohler, from the Borough of Chatham.
Earl of Kerry, from Mid-Derbyshire.
Major White.
Major Baring, from the City of Winchester.
Mr. James Hope, from the City of Sheffield and Hallamshire.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  Chinese Loan.
  Mr. NORMAN CRAIGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether under the agreement of 1910 between the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank, and German, French, and American groups, the signatory groups all received identical treatment?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey): The answer is in the affirmative.
  Mr. NORMAN CRAIGasked whether any agreement or working arrangement exists between the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank and any other bank or financial house or group which in any way affects the British share of the proposed Chinese reorganisation loan or the advances already made?
  Sir E. GREY: I have repeatedly stated that the business in connection with the loan will be equally divided between the six groups who compose the six-Power consortium. I am unaware of any subsidiary agreement or arrangement between the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank and any other financial house.
  Mr. NORMAN CRAIGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that, according to the statement made by the American bankers of the six-Power group on the 24th September, the loans comprising the reorganisation loan to China were to be spread over a period of five years; whether, in view of the fact that the monopoly of Government support accorded to the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank will extend to the period of negotiation and issue of the reorganisation loan, he will state over what period it is now proposed that the loan should extend; and whether the settlement of this question was left to the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank and the other bankers of the group?
  Sir E. GREY: I have seen the statement referred to, which rests on the assumption that the amount of the loan now being negotiated between China and

  2057
  the six groups will amount to £60,000,000, which was the amount originally suggested by the Chinese Government. The amount of the loan will, as I have often stated, depend on the requirements of the Chinese Government, and the period over which the issue is spread—which must necessarily be dependent on the amount of the loan—is entirely a matter for arrangement between the Chinese Government and the groups.
  Mr. NORMAN CRAIGasked whether the Hong Kong Government, by an agreement dated 6th October, 1905, advanced £1,100,000 at 4½ per cent., under the authorisation of His Majesty's Government, to the Viceroy of the Middle Yangtsze for the repurchase of the Hankow-Canton Railway concession from an American company, and what was the object of His Majesty's Government in authorising such an advance; whether, by a note of 9th September, 1905, to the British Consul-General at Hankow, the Viceroy gave His Majesty's Government an undertaking that British capital and materials should have the preference whenever China decided to construct the Hankow-Canton Railway; whether, in March, 1909, the contract was obtained for German capital and German materials by the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank, without any warning to His Majesty's Government, from the Chinese Imperial Government, in spite of the undertaking above referred to and in spite of the agreement between the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank itself and the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation of 2nd September, 1898, by which British preferential rights in the matter of railway concessions in the Yangtsze Valley and the provinces to the south of it were recognised?
  Sir E. GREY: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The object of His Majesty's Government in authorising the advance was to secure the connection with the Canton-Kowloon Railway. The answer to the second and third parts of the question is also in the affirmative. A compromise was, however, ultimately effected between the British and German groups by which the latter agreed to share the contract in return for concessions elsewhere. It is, however, a mistake to refer to an agreement in 1898 between the groups. A resolution in favour of an arrangement of the nature indicated was indeed passed at a conference of the groups on the date mentioned, but it was never ratified.

  Putumayo Missions.
  Sir HILDRED CARLILEasked whether any answers have been received from the Peruvian Government indicating that facilities will be accorded to either or both of the special missions which are leaving for the Putumayo?
  Sir E. GREY: I hear the Peruvian Government have stated that they will give the Franciscan mission their decided support, and that all necessary Customs facilities at Iquitos will be granted as well as the Government launch for the mission's journey to the Putumayo.
  Sir H. CARLILE: Will the second expedition also have facilities?
  Sir E. GREY: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give mc notice of that question.
  Sir H. CARLILE: It is in the question.

  Lares, Province of Calca (Slave Trade).
  Mr. HIGHAMasked whether the Foreign Secretary is aware that at Lares, in the province of Calca, in the vicinity of Cuzca, an active slave trade is in existence; if so, whether he will call the attention of the Peruvian Government to this violation of the Anglo-Peruvian antislavery treaty?
  Sir E. GREY: I have no information on this subject.
  Mr. HIGHAM: Will it not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to ask the Consul for information?
  Sir E. GREY: If the hon. Gentleman has information which leads him to suppose that British subjects are involved I shall be glad if he will let me have it. Otherwise I have nothing on which to inquire.

  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  Mr. BOLANDasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants on the Mahony estate at Dooks, near Glenbeigh, have declined to consider purchase negotiations until the evicted tenants or their representatives have been reinstated; whether he is aware that three houses have been built on a portion of the holding from which Michael O'Sullivan was evicted; and whether he will institute inquiries with a view to ascertaining whether an amicable arrangement can be come to as regards these houses as I distinct from the rest of the evicted farm?
  The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Congested Districts Board have, no information regarding the houses referred to in the second paragraph. The Board have informed the agent that if terms of purchase be arranged between the owner and the tenants, and the holdings needing rearrangement striped or consolidated, they will be prepared to consent to a direct sale through the Estates Commissioners. The Commissioners, however, will not make any advance to the representatives of Michael O'Sullivan for the purchase of any portion of the lands in question.
  Mr. BOLANDasked whether the Estates Commissioners have yet decided what action they will take in the matter of the purchase of the Colomb estate, near Cahirciveen; and whether, in view of the fact that the Congested Districts Board expressed its readiness in July last to enter into negotiations if the Commissioners will not do so, he can state how the matter now stands?
  Mr. BIRRELL: This estate is the subject of proceedings for sale direct by the owner to the tenants under the Land Purchase Acts. The question of declaring the lands to be an "estate" came before the Commissioners for hearing in Court on the 12th instant, when they made an order refusing to declare the lands to be an "estate" for the purposes of sale, but they put a stay on their order for six months to allow the owner to negotiate with the Congested Districts Board with a view to the purchase of the estate by the Board.
  Mr. O'DOWDasked whether the tenantry on the Kilross estate, situate in Ballintogher West Electoral Division, union of Sligo, late landlords Hewetson and others, forwarded a memorial to the Estates Commissioners in April last praying that the Knocatubber grazing farm on that estate be purchased for the relief of congestion in the district, and that, as a result, an inspection of this farm was carried out; and, if so, whether, seeing that the present occupier of the farm is prepared to sell, the Chief Secretary will see that steps will be taken for the immediate purchase of this farm?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners received the memorial referred to. The farm is tenanted, and the tenant has entered into an agreement with the owner
  2060
  to purchase it in connection with the sale of the estate under the Land Purchase Acts. The Commissioners are prepared to consider the purchase of the farm provided the owner acquires the tenant's interest and offers the lands to them as untenanted lands for purposes of distribution. The powers of the Commissioners to acquire land under the Land Purchase Acts are limited to the acquisition of lands in fee.
  Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked whether the Estates Commissioners will include the occupiers of houses in the village of Mount Collins, in the county of Limerick, in the purchase of the Mahony estate there; and whether they intend to give them a portion of the untenanted lands purchased by them in the district?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The buildings in Mount Collins are included in the Mahony estate, which has been acquired by the Estates Commissioners, and the resale of the holdings to the occupiers, and the allotment of such untenanted land as may be acquired, will be duly considered by the Commissioners.
  Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked whether the Estates Commissioners have yet purchased the untenanted lands at Mount Henry, Coolcappa, in the county of Limerick, the property of Miss Delmege; and, if so, can the right lion. Gentleman say when they propose to apportion it among deserving applicants in the district?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The reply is in the negative. The question of the purchase of these lands was under consideration, but no agreement was come to.

  Ennis Urban District Council.
  Captain CRAIGasked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that a typewritten circular has been issued from the office of the Ennis Urban District Council, and signed by the town clerk of Ennis, in which traders and merchants are canvassed to pay for advertisements in a programme of an entertainment to be given for the benefit of the Christian Brothers in Ennis; that it is conveyed to these merchants and traders that if they pay for these advertisements they will get a preference in supplying material required by the council and paid for out of local rates; and whether he will call the attention of the Local Government Board to this use of patronage in the interest of a Roman Catholic institution in Ennis?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I have seen a copy of the circular referred to. The Local Government Board are making inquiries with regard to the action of the town clerk in the matter, but I have not yet received their Report. I have, however, received a telegram from the superior of the Christian Brothers at Ennis, stating that he entirely disapproves of the circular, which has now been withdrawn.

  GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND BILL.

    ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY.
    Mr. HUGH BARRIEasked what was the amount standing to the credit of the Royal Irish Constabulary Force Fund on 31st October, 1902, and at 31st October, 1911; whether this fund is governed by any and what Acts of Parliament; whether the purpose of it is to compensate widows and orphans of members either surviving or on pension after the death of subscribing members; and is it intended that the proposed Home Rule Parliament should have control of this fund?
    Mr. BIRRELL: On 31st October, 1902, the securities standing to the credit of the Benefit Branch of the Constabulary Force Fund were: Consols, £220,141; Local Loans Stock, £154,000. On 31st October, 1911, the amounts were: Consols, £230,321; Local Loans Stock, £154,000; and a cash balance of £2,594. The fund was created by 6 and 7 Wliliam IV., cap. 13; and it is also governed by 29 and 30 Victoria, cap. 103, and 37 and 38 Victoria, cap. 80. The Benefit Branch of the fund was closed to new entrants by 46 and 47 Victoria, cap. 14, sec. 11. The trusts of the fund are to provide gratuities for the widows and children of subscribers, and it is invested under the direction of the National Debt Commissioners. If the fund is not wound up before the day of transfer it will after that day remain under the control of the National Debt Commissioners, save so far as it may be required to meet the claims of persons still having claims upon it.

    TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN.
    Mr. GINNELLasked now that the Amendment to the Government of Ireland Bill relating to Trinity College, Dublin, has been rejected and repudiated by the fellows and professors, if the Chief Secretary will say what attitude the Government propose to take up on that subject?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I have not received any communication from the fellows and pro-
    2062
    fessors of Trinity College, Dublin, with regard to the matter referred to in the question, and until I am satisfied that it is not the wish of the University of Dublin to press the amendment, I must keep the promise I made on 21st October last.

    CIVIL SERVICE (RETIREMENT).
    Mr. HORNERasked whether, in the event of the Government of Ireland Bill becoming law, officers in the employment of the Civil Service in Ireland, referred to in the Bill as Irish officers, whose department may be transferred to the new Government and who have only given part service in Ireland, will be entitled under the statutory terms of retirement to have their length of service reckoned as if the whole of such service had been rendered in Ireland?
    Mr. BIRRELL: Yes, Sir.

    FEDERAL SCHEME.
    Mr. FRED HALLasked the Prime Minister whether, under the scheme of federation proposed for Great Britain and Ireland it is intended to give to each country or district which is to be granted self-government representation at Westminster on similar lines to that allowed to Ireland under the Government of Ireland Bill?
    Mr. FELLasked if the federal scheme, when complete, will provide for the establishment of Customs Houses on the frontier between England and Scotland, in the same way as between England and Ireland, under the first part of the federal scheme?
    The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): As I have already stated, it would be premature at this stage to make any further statement on these matters.
    Mr. FRED HALL: Would the right lion. Gentleman inform the House when he will be in a position to make a statement?
    The PRIME MINISTER: No, Sir. I do not think I can.
    Mr. FELL: May I ask if it would not be convenient before we discuss the Irish Customs that we should know if there is to be a separate Customs for Scotland?
    The PRIME MINISTER: I think that would unduly complicate the discussion of the Irish question.

    COPYRIGHT LAW.
    Captain CRAIGasked whether the Parliament proposed to be set up under the Government of Ireland Bill will be able to legislate about or amend the existing laws of copyright?
    The PRIME MINISTER: The answer is in the negative. See Clause 2 (10) of the Bill.

  Criminal Law Amendment Act (Ireland).
  Mr. FETHERSTONHAUGHasked whether the Chief Secretary's attention has been called to a poster sent by post to Members of this House, and purporting to be published by one W. D. Wilson, of Crettingham, Norfolk, imputing that Enniskillen is a centre of the white slave traffic, and that fifty young girls had been exported from Mullaghmeen, the residence of Mr. J. West, Crocknacrieve, the residence of Mr. W. H. West, and Ballinamallard, the adjoining village, and that the Cooneyites, a Christian sect, of which Messrs. West are leading members, are actively carrying on the traffic; is he aware that Messrs. West recovered damages by action in London last year against this W. D. Wilson for a similar imputation; and has he inquired through the police whether there is any foundation whatever for the charges made by Mr.. Wilson, and with what result; and will he consult the Law Officers as to a prosecution of Mr. Wilson, if sane, for criminal libel?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I have seen a copy of the poster referred to. The police inform me that there is no truth in the statement that Enniskillen is a centre of the white slave traffic. I understand that Messrs. West instituted proceedings last year against Mr. Wilson, and that the case was settled by consent, Mr. Wilson making a public apology and paying £100 damages. I am advised that this is not a case in which the police should prosecute; the matter would appear to be one for civil action.

  Belfast Riot Cases.
  Mr. FRED HALLasked if, in view of the fact that the arrangement made for the trial of the Belfast not cases is that habitually followed in Ireland, the Chief Secretary will give particulars of all cases presenting corresponding features which occurred during the first half of the present year?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The question of the procedure in these cases is the subject of proceedings in the High Court of Justice in Ireland. The matter is, therefore, subjudice, and I cannot enter into it.

  Blackwater Harbour.
  Sir THOMAS ESMONDEasked if the Department of Agriculture will instruct their engineer to take local feeling and experience into careful account before deciding on the final shape of the proposed harbour construction at Blackwater, county Wexford?
  Mr. T. W. RUSSELL (Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture, Ireland): The reply to the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative.

  Gorey, County Wexford (Garden City Scheme).
  Sir THOMAS ESMONDEasked the Chief Secretary if he will use his influence with the Irish Local Government Board to have the inquiry into the proposed garden city scheme for Corey, county Wexford, held as speedily as possible; if, on reconsideration of the fact that there is no opposition to the scheme, the Local Government Board is still of the opinion that an inquiry is necessary; and if, pending the inquiry, the Local Government Board will authorise the payment by over draft with the district council's treasurers for the site of the proposed scheme?
  Mr. BIRRELL: An inquiry cannot be dispensed with in this case, as the scheme of the district council involves the provision of house accommodation (seventy-six cottages) as well as the purchase of land, in respect of which a provisional agreement has already been entered into with the owner. The Local Government Board are not empowered to authorise pay-men for the land by an overdraft from the council's treasurer or otherwise in anticipation of the scheme being sanctioned. As regards the holding of the inquiry, the Board cannot give precedence to this case over schemes received from other districts where the necessity for additional cottages is much greater.

  National Education (Ireland).
  Captain CRAIGasked whether, under the rules of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, no credit is given to national school teachers for teaching English grammar, and, as a con-

  2065
  sequence, simple analysis (which carries credit to the teacher) is gradually replacing the subject of English grammar, and the pupils suffer in their scholastic attainments accordingly; and what action the Chief Secretary proposes to take?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The hon. Member's question appears to be based upon some misapprehension. The Commissioners of National Education inform me that English grammar is specified in their code as one of the ordinary subjects to be taught in national schools—the analysis of simple sentences being a part of such teaching.
  Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked how many schoolmistresses in Irish national schools are under three or six months' notice from priest-managers that they are to be superseded by nuns; and what steps do the Commissioners propose to take to prevent the disemployment of teachers trained at the public expense in order that the education of Irish girls may pass into the hands of nuns; and is the Chief Secretary aware that independent educational experts, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, have condemned the educational training given by nuns?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education are only aware of one case in which it is proposed that a school conducted by ordinary national teachers shall be placed in charge of nuns. The answer to the second paragraph of the question is in the negative.
  Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked whether the then resident Commissioner of National Education declared on oath, before the Powis Commission, that the Board permitted nuns to violate the rule which forbids secular and religious instruction to be carried on simultaneously, a rule which was framed to prevent proselytising, and do the Commissioners connive at the violation of this and other parts of the conscience Clause on the part of nuns; and will the Chief Secretary say whether the rule, which has been modified by inserting the words in the same apartment, has, as a change of a fundamental rule, received the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant?
  Mr. BIRRELL: No such declaration as is attributed to the late Sir Alexander MacDonnell, who WHS Resident Commissioner in 1868, when the Powis Commission was sitting, can be traced in the published evidence given before that Com-
  2066
  mission. The Commissioners of National Education do not connive at the violation of the rule referred to or any other of the conscience Clauses. The words "in the same apartment" that occur in Rule 31 of the present code first appeared in Part I., Section IV., Rule 7, of the Rules and Regulations of 1354, which, were submitted to and received the approval of the then Lord Lieutenant.
  Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked if the Chief Secretary will state in how many national schools in Ireland is Rule 16 of the Code of the National Board of Education departed from in permitting emblems and symbols of Roman Catholicism to be permanently exhibited in schoolrooms; and how many of these schools are attended by Protestants?
  Mr. BIRRELL: As I have already informed the hon. Member for North Londonderry, the Commissioners of National Education have on various occasions sanctioned the exhibition in national schools, during the hours of secular instruction, of pictures of scriptural subjects. Some time ago it was brought to their notice, however, that, acting on this sanction, the managers of a few schools had introduced statues of a religious character. The Commissioners decided not to take any action in these cases, but they resolved that the introduction of any further statues into any national school should be expressely forbidden. The schools in which pictures and statues are exhibited are comparatively few, and are mostly convent national schools attended solely by Roman Catholic children with one or two exceptions, and in these cases only a few Protestant children are on the rolls. If any violation of the rule is brought to the notice of the Commissioners the matter will be inquired into.

  Old Age Pensions.
  Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked on what ground the Local Government Board upheld the decision of the pension officer in the appeal from the decision of the Ballingarry, county Limerick, sub-committee awarding Michael Hallinan, of Rylands, Rathkeale, a pension of 4s. per week; and whether, if it were on the ground of income, the Chief Secretary will state how the Local Government Board made out that applicant's income was over £31 10s. a year, having regard to the fact that he has only his board and lodging it

  2067
  his son-in-law's house, and had it years before the Old Age Pension Act was passed?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Michael Hallinan lives with his son-in-law on a farm of sixty-five acres, which carries about twenty-two cows. The son-in-law is a creamery manager, for which he receives £125 a year, and, taking all the circumstances into account, claimant's maintenance on the farm appeared to the Local Government Board to be clearly worth more than £.31 10s. a year.

  NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.

    COURT OF REFEREES (INVERKEITHING).
    Mr. ADAMSONasked the President of the Board of Trade whether arrangements have been made to enable the workmen employed at the Admiralty Explosive Works at Crombie to record their votes for representatives on the Court of Referees under Part II. of the National Insurance Act without having to travel the distance of seven miles to the Labour Exchange at Inverkeithing?
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Buxton): Arrangements are being made for opening a polling station at Crombie.

    SANATORIUM BENEFIT.
    Lord N. CRICHTON-STUARTasked how many sanatoria have been built under the National Insurance Act; how many are in course of erection; and for how many plans have been passed by the Commissioners under the Act?
    The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Burns): The Local Government Board have approved, under the National Insurance Act, 117 sanatoria and hospitals, containing 4,597 beds. The erection of new sanatoria and the extension of existing buildings are now under consideration generally by local authorities, who are formulating complete schemes for the treatment of tuberculosis.
    Lord NINIAN CRICHTON-STUART: Arising out of that answer, may I ask whether the sanatoria to which the right hon. Gentleman refers had been newly built in accordance with the Act?
    Mr. BURNS: No, certainly not. It could not be, the Act having been only so recently passed, but I would like to say there has been considerable extension, and a
    2068
    large number of suitable places that were not being used for other infectious diseases have been very wisely and economically diverted to tuberculosis.
    Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many consumptives there are in the country, and what proportion the number, 4,597 bears to that number?
    Mr. BURNS: Seventy thousand people die in the United Kingdom every year and 300,000 are ill; 9,000 beds were wanted, and in four months, under the Insurance Act, accommodation has been provided for nearly 4,600.
    Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: May I ask, inasmuch as you have secured sufficient bed accommodation for 4,597 persons, will the remaining beds be found in the next two months?
    Mr. BURNS: By the time the 9,000 require the beds, I have not the least doubt that that number will be available.
    Captain FABER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether county hospitals, where other people are taken care of, are being used?
    Mr. BURNS: Yes, in every case where the local authority can avail themselves of sanitary hospitals owned by county councils or borough councils, they have done so; and where there was equally good or better accommodation in possession of voluntary institutions, they have very sensibly sent their tuberculous patients to these institutions.
    Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Is it not a fact that in the Act there are words which make it impossible for certain local authorities to take advantage of the Act?
    Mr. BURNS: No. Under Section 64 it is possible for a county council which previously could not provide hospital or sanatoria now so to do, and in each of these cases I have sanctioned a token Grant of £10 to enable them to proceed with their scheme.

    CIVIL SERVICE CANDIDATES.
    Lord N. CRICHTON-STUARTasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state if unsuccessful candidates for examinations under the Civil Service Commissioners for appointments under the National Insurance Act will be taken in their order of merit for future appointments under the Act irrespective

    2069
    of their proficiency in any particular language?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Masterman): The answer is in the affirmative as regards the appointments under Part I. of the Insurance Act, subject only to this qualification—that where the duties of any particular post require a knowledge of any language in addition to English, such post may be offered to the highest qualified candidate who knows that language. I may add, however, to prevent misapprehension, that appointments have already been offered in the case of some of the examinations to all the candidates who reached the qualifying standard. In other cases the lists will be kept open for some time longer, but thereafter vacancies will be filled, not from these special lists, but by means of the ordinary competitive examinations by which the public service generally is recruited.

    MEMBERSHIP OF APPROVED SOCIETIES.
    Sir PHILIP MAGNUSasked whether some approved societies require as a qualification for membership that the applicant, not employed by way of manual labour, shall sign a form certifying that he has a total income, including earnings, not exceeding £160 a year, and stating that persons whose total income, including earnings, exceeds £160 a year are not qualified to be insured; and, if so, what action he proposes to take in the matter?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am not aware of any such case, but if the hon. Member will give me particulars I will have inquiries made.

    INSURED PERSON'S ILLNESS.
    Sir PHILIP MAGNUSasked whether, in the event of an insured person taken suddenly ill in a county other than that in which he usually resides, he is required before being able to secure, under the National Insurance Act, medical attendance to produce such evidence as the committee, with the approval of the Commissioners, may determine; and, if so, whether he will state the nature of the evidence required to be produced?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The exact nature of the evidence to be required is to be determined before medical benefit commences by the insurance committee, with the approval of the Commissioners, and the matter is receiving the consideration of the committees.
    Sir P. MAGNUS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say the character of the evidence required?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: When the committees have decided, I shall be able to answer that question.

  Evicted Tenants (Reinstatement).
  Mr. O'DONNELLasked what further steps have been taken to reinstate Mr. Malone, of Lough Dingle; and whether, seeing that his case was four years ago recognised as a deserving one, some effective steps will be taken immediately to deal with it?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have, after further inquiry and consideration, decided to take no action in regard to Mr. Malone's application for reinstatement.
  Mr. O'DONNELLasked whether Matthew Reynolds, of 16, Russell Street, Tralee, has sent in a claim for reinstatement in the lands held by his father on the estate of Colonel Nash, at Ballycarty, Tralee; what steps have been taken to inquire into his case; and whether, seeing that the lands are untenanted, immediate action will be taken in the matter?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The application referred to was only received by the Estates Commissioners on 10th October, and, as it was not received within the period prescribed by the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907, it cannot be dealt with under that Act, and has not been inquired into by the Commissioners.

  Labourers Acts (Ireland).
  Mr. SHEEHANasked whether, in March, 1910, the Cork Rural District Council made application to the Local Government Board for sanction to a loan of £41,700 for the erection of 228 cottages authorised under the Labourers Acts; did the Local Government Board then sanction £38,820 for the purpose; have they now refused to sanction the balance of £3,000 required to pay the liabilities incurred by the council in connection with the scheme; whether the district council have kept well within their estimated expenditure; and, seeing that on two previous occasions the Local Government Board sanctioned the advance of balances of loans under similar circumstances, will the same course be now followed so as to avoid the extra cost to the ratepayers involved in borrowing in the open market?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Owing to the large number of pending improvement schemes to be financed out of the additional £1,000,000 provided by the Labourers Act of 1911, the Local Government Board are unable to sanction the payment of the balance required from the Land Commission in connection with the scheme referred to. The rural district council will not suffer any great hardship in having to borrow in the open market the additional £3,000 required, especially as they have admittedly been treated somewhat generously on the occasion of former schemes.

  Agriculture Statistics (Ireland).
  Mr. LARDNERasked why the Report and Tables of the agricultural output of Ireland for the year 1908, prepared in connection with the Census of Production Act. 1900, have only now been circulated as a Departmental Paper; and will he state when the compilation was commenced and completed by the statistics and intelligence branch, and when his Department forwarded the separate Irish statistics to the Board of Trade?
  Mr. RUSSELL: The compilation of the Report referred to, which is the first of the kind published in this country, was a matter of considerable difficulty. The necessary inquiries could not be set on foot until the spring of the year 1909; and as the work progressed many unexpected questions arose which required a good deal of time for their determination. Moreover, it was indispensable that careful scrutiny of the final estimates and figures should be made before issuing the Report. The information contained in the Report was supplied, in the rough, to the Board of Trade in November, 1911.

  Foot-and-Mouth Disease.
  Mr. JOHN O'CONNORasked whether the cattle fair which is permitted to be held on the 20th instant at Naas will be held on the fair green, outside the restricted area; whether the place for holding the sheep fair, 100 yards from the fair green, is within the restricted area; and will the Department take steps to facilitate the holding of the cattle and sheep fair on the same day?
  Mr. RUSSELL: Facilities will be afforded for the holding of the fair for cattle and sheep on the date mentioned at the customary places.

  Gold Coast Colony (Palm Oil).
  Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether it is contemplated to grant to any suitable applicant the privilege of being the sole manufacturer of palm oil throughout any 300 square miles of the Gold Coast Colony; whether these special privileges are to continue to be granted to all and sundry even after the industry has been proved and established; and whether the privileges will be put up to public tender and granted to the highest bidder.
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Harcourt): I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave yesterday to the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for St. George's, Hanover Square.

  Ceylon Excise Law.
  Dr. CHAPPLEasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received resolutions from temperance bodies throughout the United Kingdom strongly protesting against the new Excise law for Ceylon, whereby 1,000 new toddy licences are being forced upon the native population against the will and religious belief of the majority; and whether he will set up a Committee of Inquiry before permitting the law to take effect?
  Mr. HARCOURT: I have received many resolutions on the subject of the new Excise law, the effect of which is not correctly described in my hon. Friend's question. The answer to the second part of the question is that the licences have already been issued under the previously existing law and, therefore, would not be affected by a delay in bringing the new Ordinance into effect. I am not prepared to recommend the Governor to appoint a Committee of Inquiry, but I am watching the situation and hope to profit by experience when it is obtained.

  Regent's Park (Crown Estate).
  Mr. TOUCHEasked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, what procedure is necessary before leave can be obtained for building on or making alterations in Regent's Park, including those parts in private enclosures; and what powers of protecting the amenities of the park are possessed by the Office of Works or other Departments represented in this House?
  Mr. WEDGWOOD BENN (Lord of the Treasury): Those parts of the Regent's Park Crown estate which are let on lease are administered by the Commissioners of Woods, who, as ground landlords, can exercise control over all building operations. The public portions of the park are administered by the Commissioners of Works, without whose consent no building of any kind can be erected.

  Wireless Telegraphy.
  Captain CRAIGasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that only one Marconigram operator is carried by certain Peninsular and Oriental mail steamers; and whether, in view of the experience gained within recent years, the Board will issue Regulations that every ocean-going steamer fitted with the Marconigram instrument shall carry at least two operators?
  Mr. BUXTON: I am informed by the Peninsular and Oriental Company that only one Marconi operator is carried on certain of their ships, and that it is difficult to find sufficient work for this operator, as there are few opportunities for communication cast of Suez. The Board of Trade have no power to issue Regulations as to the number of operators to be carried, but, as I have already stated to the House, a Bill requiring certain ships to be provided with wireless telegraphy apparatus has been prepared, and the question of operators will be dealt with in it.
  Mr. FRED HALLasked the grounds on which the letters patent in respect of certain improvements in wireless telegraphy granted to Ettone Bellini were revoked; and whether any of such improvements have been or are proposed to be embodied in the Marconi system?
  Mr. BUXTON: It is assumed that the patent referred to is No. 11339 of 1911. This patent was revoked by the Comptroller-General of Patents on the 28th September last in consequence of an offer made by the patentee to surrender the patent under the provisions of Section 26 (3) of the Patents and Designs Act, 1907. The reason given by the patentee for making this offer was as follows:—"That the invention is found to be wanting in novelty." I have no official information as to the last part of the question.

  Wheat Statistics.
  Mr. NEWMANasked the average price as on 1st November for wheat of fair
  2074
  to good milling quality at Paris and Berlin, respectively; and the import duties, if any, per quarter at present levied on imports of wheat by the French and German authorities, respectively?
  Mr. BUXTON: So far as the Board of Trade is aware there is no official price quoted in Paris or Berlin for wheat described as of "fair to good milling quality." The import duty per Imperial quarter charged on wheat is 12s. 2d. in France and 11s. 10d. in Germany.

  Taxation (Collection).
  Mr. FRED HALLasked the Prime Minister what period has elapsed between the passing by the House of Commons of Resolutions under which taxation is raised, and the giving of Royal Assent to the Act confirming the same, in each of the ten years up to and including 1912; and whether the legislation promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make provision for the earlier passing of the Finance Act in future, or whether it is intended to give validity to Resolutions of the House of Commons without the concurrence of the House of Lords or the Crown?
  The PRIME MINISTER: With the permission of the hon. Member I will circulate a statement giving the information asked for in the first part of the question. Pending the introduction of the legislation referred to, I am not in a position to make any statement in regard to the latter part of the question.
  Mr. FRED HALL: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will state his intentions with regard to the Upper House before any of this legislation is brought forward?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Either before or at the time.

  Legislation by Reference.
  Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYasked the Prime Minister if his attention has been directed to the growth of the practice of legislation by reference, as instanced by the current case of the Criminal Law Amendment Act; and whether he can see his way to support an amendment of the Standing Orders in order to give effect to the suggestion made by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire in the proposed new Standing Order, now on the Order Paper, which seeks to secure the explanation of a Bill and all its references upon its first introduction to the House?
  The PRIME MINISTER: The practice of legislation by reference is easy to deprecate, but, under modern conditions, difficult to check. I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion, but at present I do not see my way to propose such a drastic amendment of the Standing Orders.
  Viscount CASTLEREAGH: May I ask how he proposes to amend existing Standing Orders when he has done his best to destroy the whole basis on which Standing Orders and Rules of Procedure exist?

  Land Values Committee.
  Mr. WEIGALLasked what is the specific information on the land question which can best be obtained by means of a secret inquiry, and not a Royal Commission?
  The PRIME MINISTER: As I stated a few days ago, it was considered that on certain points information could be more usefully and expeditiously collected by an unofficial body, than by a Royal Commission.
  Mr. G. D. FABER: Does the Prime Minister approve of this secret inquiry?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I must refer to my previous answers.
  Mr. FABER: They were very uncertain.
  Mr. REMNANT: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman considers any inquiry is of any use unless you hear both sides?
  The PRIME MINISTER: No, Sir; certainly not.

  House of Commons.
  Mr. NEWMANasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that it has been found necessary to propose an alteration of the dates on which the various stages of the Government of Ireland Bill shall be concluded, he will state whether such rearrangement will lead to a curtailment of the Christmas Recess?
  The PRIME MINISTER: The proposals of the Government with regard to the Christmas Recess will be announced in due course.
  Mr. NEWMAN: Will it be in the course of the next few days?
  Earl WINTERTONasked the Prime Minister if he is yet in a position to state whether it is his intention to move a new Standing Order to ensure that hon.
  2076
  Members who fail to attend to their Parliamentary duties shall be fined the whole or a portion of their Parliamentary salaries; and if he will consider the possibility of so amending the Standing Orders that hon. Members voting in a Division shall be compelled to be present in the House itself during some part of the Debate?
  Mr. KELLAWAY: Before the right hon. Gentleman answers the question, may I ask if he is aware that the Noble Lord was absent from three hundred Divisions?
  Earl WINTERTON: Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, may I ask if he is aware that the sole cause of my absence was illness, and will the hon. Gentleman now apologise for his unkindly reference?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I have no doubt what the Noble Lord has said is perfectly correct. I think, as I said the other day, that we should gain a little more experience of the new system before considering the adoption of these or similar proposals. I rather doubt the practicability of the second of the Noble Lord's suggestions.
  Earl WINTERTON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that there are plenty of precedents for the procedure mentioned in the first part of the question in the procedure of foreign parliaments, and as to the second part, is he aware that on Clause 13 of the Government of Ireland Bill, while 200 Members voted in the Lobby in the Debate only forty-three Members were present in the House to hear an important speech by himself?
  The PRIME MINISTER: It has often been my misfortune to be present here when very few hon. Members were listening, and also to take part in a Division in which I did not hear any part of the Debate, and I believe that is the case with every hon. Member on both sides.
  Mr. FRED HALLasked the Secretary to the Treasury if, with a view to the interests of other taxpayers, it will be possible to arrange for the salary to Members to be divided into two amounts, one a fixed amount to represent the value of services rendered and the other an amount free from Income Tax and to be supported by vouchers to represent reasonable travelling expenses?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: As indicated in the replies given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to previous questions on this subject, I see no reason

  2077
  for modifying the practice which has been adopted for administrative convenience.
  Mr. FRED HALL: Could the right hon. Gentleman say why?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the replies of my right hon. Friend.
  Colonel WILLIAMS: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if there is any statutory authority for such division?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I think the subject has been very fully dealt with by my right hon. Friend. I have nothing to add.
  Mr. HOGGEasked the right hon. Member for the Epping Division, as Chair man of the Kitchen Committee, whether the expert called in by the Kitchen Committee is connected with a railway company; and whether he will consider the desirability of calling in some catering expert whose experience is not confined to this branch of catering?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: The Sub-Committee appointed for the purpose consider that the expert they called in is well suited by his knowledge and training to assist them. His experience is not confined to railway catering.
  Mr. HOGGE: Is the Gentleman referred to connected with a railway company?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: Yes; he is connected with a railway company, but I can no more call him a railway expert than I could call the hon. Member himself a cheesemonger because he eats cheese.
  Mr. HOGGE: Is it the case that the light hon. Gentleman is a director of the company from which this expert was appointed?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: Yes, that is the case.
  Mr. HOGGEasked the right hon. Member for the Epping Division, as Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, what wages the waiters in the House receive; how many hours they are on duty; and what arrangements obtain for overtime?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: The fifteen dining-room waiters employed regularly during the Session are paid as follows: Two at 22s. per week, twelve at 20s. per week, one at 18s. per week, with food and refreshments. There are other waiters in more responsible positions, who are paid higher wages. Their hours of employ-
  2078
  ment are from 9 a.m. to 9.30 on Monday and Wednesday, or from 9.30 a.m. to the rising of the House on Tuesday and Thursday. Half on late duty alternate nights. On Friday their duty is from 9 a.m. to the rising of the House. They are allowed two hours off duty in the afternoons. On Saturday they finish at I o'clock and are free until Monday 9 o'clock. They are also paid full wages during the Easter and Whitsun Recesses. If the House sits until 1.30 they are paid a half-day's wage, or a whole day's wage at 3.30. If occasion arises that other employment is offered them, as on Saturday last (Lord Mayor's Show), they are allowed to clean the plate on Friday and finish then. The evening waiters (approximately fifty) are engaged at 6 o'clock for dinner, and are paid 3s. 6d., or 6s. if engaged at 12 noon.
  Mr. HOGGE: Is it the case that when the House rises before 1.30 or before 3.30 that these waiters get no overtime?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: They are not paid overtime till 1.30 or 3.30.
  Mr. MORRELL: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of raising the wages of the waiters with a view to doing away with the system of tipping?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: The feeling, I think, is very much against abolition.
  Mr. POINTER: Are not the class of waiters who receive 6s. from noon employed almost continuously, and therefore are in the nature of almost continuously employed persons, having much more to do than those who are on the staff, and can the right hon. Gentleman give them some consideration?
  Colonel LOCKWOOD: That is rather an intricate question for me to follow: some of the waiters, good men, are employed frequently, or every night during the Session.
  Mr. WARDLE: Has anything further been done with regard to pensions for waiters as promised some time ago?

  Marconi Agreement.
  Mr. VINCENT KENNEDYasked the Prime Minister whether he can give any indication as to when the Public Committee on Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Company, Limited, Agreement will report?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I am not in a position to give any indication; the matter rests entirely with the Committee.

  Manitoba Wheat (Prices).
  Mr. NEWMANasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can, as on 1st November, give the average selling price of the three contract grades (Nos. 1, 2, and 3 Northern) Manitoba wheat at the Port of London, and also the Manitoba feed at the same port and on the same date; whether the average price for wheat imported from Manitoba is obtained by averaging the prices ruling for contract grades and for feed; and whether, in the event of his answer being in the affirmative, he will state of what value an average price so obtained may be for purposes of comparison with prices ruling abroad which are for wheat of fair to good milling quality only?
  Mr. BUXTON: The Board of Trade have not made any calculation of the average price for wheat imported from Manitoba, nor am I aware of the grounds of the assertion that the official price quotations of wheat in foreign countries are for wheat of "fair to good milling quality" only. I will have the prices asked for printed with the Votes.

  Portugal (Customs Duty on Cycles).
  Mr. FELLasked (1) if the Customs Duty on British motor-cycles entering Portugal is £11 5s. per machine and on German motor-cycles £3 per machine; why there is this difference; and does the Board of Trade propose to take any steps in the matter; and (2) if the duty on British bicycles entering Portugal is 27 per cent, ad valorem, and on French bicycles entering Portugal only 10 per cent, ad valorem; if this country enjoys the benefit of the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause with Portugal; and, if so, why this preference is given to France?
  Mr. BUXTON: I understand that French cycles other than motor-cycles are dutiable on importation into Portugal at the same rate as cycles manufactured in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. The duty levied on French motor-cycles is governed by the Franco-Portuguese modus vivendi of February, 1911, and amounts to £3 7s. 6d. each. The reduced rate of duty is applicable to German motor-cycles by virtue of the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause in the German-Portuguese Commercial Treaty. The United Kingdom has at present no
  2080
  Most-Favoured-Nation arrangement with Portugal, but negotiations for the conclusion of a commercial treaty between Portugal and the United Kingdom have been for some time in progress.

  Collisions at Sea (Regulations).
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the decision of Sheriff Gardner Millar, recalling the decision of Sheriff-substitute Lyell, with reference to a collision in the Holy Loch, on 25th September. 1911, that the small sailing yacht "Marguerite." did not exhibit any light, in breach of Article 11 of the Board of Trade Regulations for preventing collisions at sea, and that this contributed to the collision; whether his attention has been called to the evidence given at the previous proceedings to the effect that it was customary for small yachts lying at anchor in such positions not to exhibit lights; and whether he now proposes to take any steps to ensure the observance of the Board of Trade Regulations?
  Mr. BUXTON: My attention has been called to the decision to which my hon. Friend refers, and to the evidence given in the previous proceedings. I understand that leave to appeal from the sheriff's decision has been given, and I should prefer to postpone consideration of the case until after the result of that appeal is known.

  Queues.
  Mr. NEWMANasked the Home Secretary what portion of the footway may be occupied by theatre queues, and also by crowds inspecting an attractive window display, without being considered by the police to cause an obstruction?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna): It is impossible to lay down a formula applicable to all cases. When it appears probable that the police will be compelled to intervene, those responsible are invariably warned before action is taken.
  Mr. NEWMANasked why police assistance is refused for the regulation of queues waiting to inspect attractive window displays, while it is granted for the regulation of queues waiting to enter theatres?
  Mr. McKENNA: I pointed out in reply to a previous question of the hon. Member that theatre queues have a kind of

  2081
  prescriptive status. The Commissioner of Police informs me that the police have no experience of queues waiting to inspect shop windows.
  Mr. NEWMAN: Is it not a fact that a great many theatres are giving up the practice of queues altogether? Could not the right hon. Gentleman encourage that practice?
  Mr. McKENNA: I should like notice of that question; I am not aware of the circumstances.

  Driving to the Public Danger (Penalties).
  Mr. FRED HALLasked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to two charges recently brought before the magistrate at Bow Street and Marlborough Street police courts for driving to the public danger, in one of which the accused, a taxi-cab driver, was severely punished for being intoxicated while in charge of a car, while in the other case, that of a young woman charged with a similar offence, a light penalty only was imposed; and if he will inquire into the matter and, if the facts justify such action, order the release of the man?
  Mr. McKENNA: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which was given to his question on Thursday and Tuesday last, and which was printed in the Parliamentary Debates.
  Mr. FRED HALL: May I ask whether it is correct for a Minister to circulate the answer to a question when before a quarter to four notice has been given at the Table of the withdrawal of the question owing to its not having been reached during Question Time?
  Mr. SPEAKER: The answer ought not to be circulated in such a case; but, as I have said before, it is not always easy for a Minister to know whether or not a question has been postponed. If he is made aware of the fact that a question is postponed he ought to withhold the answer and not hand it in at the Table. Precautions are taken as far as possible to carry out that rule, but sometimes, when a great number of questions are not reached, it is not easy to see that the rule is carried out.
  Mr. McKENNA: May I say that no notice reached me that the question had been postponed.
  Mr. FRED HALL: May I inform the right hon. Gentleman that I gave the notification at the Table?
  Mr. SNOWDENasked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to a case before the Blackpool police court on 28th October, when Thomas Owtsin Thurston was convicted of driving a motor car at a dangerous speed, thereby causing the death of a woman, and was fined £10; is he aware that seven previous convictions were recorded against this man for offences under the Motor Acts; and if he will introduce legislation to provide a more severe punishment for such offences?
  Mr. McKENNA: My attention was not called to this case until my hon. Friend's question appeared on the Paper. I am making inquiry, and will communicate with my hon. Friend as soon as I have had an opportunity of considering the case.

  Safety Lamps.
  Sir JOHN RANDLESasked the Home Secretary whether, with a view to encouraging the production of miners' safety lamps, he will revise the regulations respecting the tests at Eskmeals in respect of furnishing explicit details of the apparatus and the tests to which the lamps are to be submitted; and whether he will consider the desirability of reducing the fee of £20 for each lamp tested so that manufacturers sending in a quantity of lamps for testing will not be restrained by the high fee?
  Mr. McKENNA: The Memorandum which has been issued by the Home Office furnishes very explicit details of the nature of the test, and a description of the apparatus used in testing lamp glasses has been already circulated to manufacturers. They have also been given an opportunity of seeing the testing arrangements at Eskmeals. My Department is in close touch with the manufacturers, and is furnishing them with any information they may require as to the test. I am afraid I do not see my way to a modification of the fee for the test of a lamp, which has been fixed so as to cover as nearly as possible the expenses of testing. I have, however, been able to make concessions to meet the views of manufacturers in connection with the glass tests and the question of variations in the form of an approved lamp.
  Sir J. RANDLES: Would the right hon. Gentleman be willing to receive manufacturers who think that the explanations given are not explicit enough?
  Mr. McKENNA: I shall be glad to consider the point, but I should like to hear first what is the nature of their complaint.

  Motor Omnibus Traffic (Metropolis).
  Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYasked the Home Secretary if he is aware that certain roads in Paddington are being rapidly worn out by motor omnibuses, while the houses on each side of them are being shaken to pieces by the constant vibrations set up by these heavy vehicles, and that the ratepayers who are having their property damaged have to contribute to mend the roads, and thus pay part of the expenses of motor omnibus shareholders; and if, in view of the character of the question in this and other parts of the Metropolis, he will frame suitable legislation himself, and give this House the opportunity of accepting it, instead of appointing a Select Committee to inquire into facts already known?
  Mr. McKENNA: I am aware that among the disadvantages which heavy motor traffic brings in its train are the wear and tear of the road surface and damage to house property adjoining its route. The reference to the Select Committee will not include these matters, but will deal with the more urgent question of accidents. I fear I can hold out no hope that this House is likely in the immediate future to find time to deal with so controversial a subject.

  Truck Act (Amendment).
  Mr. ALBERT SMITHasked the Home Secretary whether it is his intention to make provision, in his promised Bill to amend the Truck Act, for the total abolition of the system of fining workpeople which now prevails in factories and workshops?
  Mr. McKENNA: I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave to a similar question put to me by the Noble Lord the Member for South Nottingham on the 6th of this month.

  Firing at Escaping Convicts.
  Sir WILLIAM BYLESasked whether a convict attempting to escape from Dartmoor prison a fortnight ago was shot down and seriously wounded by a warder;
  2084
  what is the condition of the man now; is he still alive; and what is the law which empowers a servant of the prison in these circumstances to fire at a prisoner in the open field?
  Mr. McKENNA: On 31st of October an attempt to escape from custody was made by two convicts belonging to a party who were taking shelter from a storm. A civil guard pursued them, and after repeatedly calling on them to stop, and finding they were gaining on him, he fired at their legs. One of the two was slightly wounded, and attacked the guard with an iron bar which he carried with him in his attempt to escape, but was secured without further injury. The other received three pellets in the body, and was taken to hospital in an ambulance. He is reported to be making favourable progress towards recovery. Under the Common Law it is the duty of a prison officer to do whatever may be necessary to prevent the escape of a felon, and he may use firearms if the escape cannot otherwise be prevented. In this case an inquiry into the facts shows that the officer did no more than his duty as laid down in the Standing Orders for Convict Prisons

  Flogging.
  Sir W. BYLESasked the Home Secretary whether his Department is carefully noting the increase in the number of corporal punishments ordered by the magistrates under the Vagrancy Act; whether there have now been at least seventeen such sentences during the present year against a total of seven during the previous three years, and that more than half of them have been passed by Mr. Lawrie, the Deputy-Chairman of the London Sessions; and whether any caution has been given by the Home Office?
  Mr. McKENNA: Courts of Quartet Sessions are authorised by law to order corporal punishment for incorrigible rogues committed to the Sessions for sentence, and I have no authority to interfere with the exercise of their powers except in so far as good reason may be shown for recommending an exercise of the prerogative of mercy in any particular case. From the very small proportion of cases of incorrigible rogues in which corporal punishment is ordered, and from the proved facts of those cases which come under my notice, I am satisfied that the power in question is used with care and discrimination, and I see no reason for taking action in the direction suggested.

  2085
  The prisoner is in every case entitled to apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal, and the sentence is by law suspended to allow him time to do so.
  Sir W. BYLESasked the Home Secretary whether any statistics are available of the number of flogging punishments in English prisons; whether these punishments are ordered by one or two visiting justices after an inquiry held in private; whether they are formally submitted to, but rarely interfered with by him; and whether he will consider the advisability, in the public interest, of admitting the Press, as representing the public, to these inquiries?
  Mr. McKENNA: A Return of corporal punishments awarded in prisons is given in Appendix No. 10 of the Annual Report of the Prison Commissioners which is presented to Parliament. Such punishments are awarded by the board of visitors for a convict prison or the visiting committee for a local prison, in accordance with Section 5 of the Prison Act, 1898, which requires that not less than three persons, two of whom shall be justices of the peace, should adjudicate, and that the evidence shall be given on oath. The inquiry, which is judicial, takes place in the prison, and the public are not admitted. All cases have by law to be submitted to the Secretary of State. Out of thirty cases ordered during the year ending 31st March, 1912, the Secretary of State reduced the punishment in six cases. I see no reason for any departure from the existing practice in this matter.
  Mr. MORRELL: Is the prisoner represented in any way at the inquiry?
  Mr. McKENNA: No.
  Mr. WATT: Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why there are so many more cases of flogging than occurred under his predecessor at the Home Office?
  Mr. McKENNA: The reverse is the fact. There have been fewer floggings than ever before.
  Sir W. BYLES: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether it would be a safeguard to permit the Press to be present?
  Mr. McKENNA: No; I should hardly think it would be desirable to revive public floggings.
  Sir W. BYLES: The right hon. Gentleman has quite misunderstood me. I did
  2086
  not ask for public floggings, but for public inquiry before flogging was ordered.
  Mr. McKENNA: In a sense it is not private. The visitors represent the public in a certain sense, and two of them must be justices of the peace.
  Sir W. BYLESasked the Home Secretary what discretion is allowed to the governors of reformatory schools to inflict the punishment of flogging; is there any judicial trial before such punishment is inflicted; are there any regulations as to who should administer or who should witness the punishment; and is there any limitation as to the kind of instrument used or the number of strokes permitted?
  Mr. McKENNA: A superintendent of a reformatory school for boys has a discretion in inflicting corporal punishment within the limits of rules for the management and discipline of the school made by the managers and subject to the Secretary of State's approval. The Model Rules of the Department, which were drawn up some years ago, prescribe that chastisement may be inflicted only by the superintendent, or in his presence by an officer specially authorised by him, or by the chief educational officer who is required to report to the superintendent at once. The Model Rules allow of eighteen strokes with the birch or eight strokes with the cane as a maximum, but I issued a circular some months ago to managers stating that pending the Report of the Departmental Committee on Reformatory Schools, corporal punishment should be used as rarely as possible, and that the number of strokes should never exceed twelve.

  Factory Act Districts (Wales and Monmouthshire).
  Mr. HINDSasked the Home Secretary whether he will rearrange the existing districts for the administration of the Factory Acts with a view of constituting Wales and Monmouthshire as a separate district?
  Mr. McKENNA: As I informed the hon. Member for the Denbigh District on the 31st of October, for the purpose of administration of the Factory Acts, Wales and Monmouthshire are divided into three districts, with headquarters and a full staff, at Cardiff, Swansea, and Wrexham, respectively. At one time the whole of South Wales and Monmouth were combined in one district, but it was found to be too large for administrative purposes, and it was again divided into two districts.

  Established Church (Wales) Bill.—Public Petitions.
  Mr. KINGasked the right hon. Member for Morpeth, as Chairman of the Committee on Public Petitions, whether he is aware that certain petitions against the Established Church (Wales) Bill are being signed in the parish churches of England and Wales at or after the times of public worship, and that invitations to sign such petitions are being made by the clergy during divine service; and whether the Report of the Committee on Public Petitions can be utilised for information on this matter so as to show how far parish churches are being used for political agitation?
  Mr. BURT: The Select Committee on Public Petitions have no official cognisance of the matter to which my hon. Friend refers; nor can they report on such matters under their Order of Reference.
  Mr. KING: Arising out of that question and reply, may I ask whether the Committee can take into consideration whether some means cannot be arranged by which hon. Members wishing a respite from politics on Sundays can obtain it in the parish churches?
  Mr. BURT: I fear not, Sir; I do not think they are Sabbatarians.

  Printing Trade (Government Contracts).
  Mr. PETOasked the Secretary to the Treasury on what dates prior or during the month of July he saw the representatives of the master printers of the London district; and on what occasions and on what dates these master printers had the opportunity of putting their case fully before the Government?
  Mr. MASTERMAN.: I did not receive any request from the master printers for an interview at any time before my decision was known at the end of last month. Had I done so, I would have been as willing to hear them as I was to hear the representatives of the men. I had, however, before me figures supplied during the winter to the Stationery Office by the secretary of the Masters' Association, which were at variance with those supplied by the men's representatives, and it was in the face of these conflicting statements that I asked the Board of Trade to make an impartial inquiry independently of either party. The Board of Trade results were arrived at by figures supplied by
  2088
  masters and not by men, and my decision with regard to Government contractors was based upon the facts thus independently ascertained and not on the representations of either side; nor would it have been affected, so far as these facts were concerned, by representations from either side.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Is it not the fact that the right hon. Gentleman took care to receive the newspaper proprietors?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: No; I explained very fully in the Debate on the Adjournment what actually happened. Perhaps the hon. Member will refer to that.

  Postage Stamps (Illustrations).
  Mr. NORMAN CRAIGasked (1) whether the notice dated the 16tli October, 1912, and issued by the Board of Inland Revenue is applicable to illustrations of postage and postage-paid stamps of foreign countries, and to illustrations of postage and postage-paid stamps issued by the British Government but no longer valid; and (2) under what Statute the Board of Inland Revenue have issued regulations in regard to illustrations of postage and postage-paid stamps, in so far as such illustrations reproduce foreign stamps and British stamps no longer valid, respectively?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The notice of regulations referred to in the hon. Member's two questions is applicable to postage and postage paid stamps of foreign countries. It is issued in substitution for a notice of the 1st June, 1906, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 65 of the Post Office Act, 1908, and covers illustrations of British stamps no longer valid. Current and obsolete stamps are reproduced indiscriminately for philatelic purposes, and it is not practicable or desirable to distinguish between them.
  Mr. NORMAN CRAIGput a supplementary question which the Official Reporters could not hear.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will be good enough to put that down. I could only imperfectly hear it.

MR. RONALD M'NEILL.

  PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
  Mr. RONALD M'NEILL: I desire in a few words, Mr. Speaker, to give something in the nature of a personal explanation of

  2089
  an incident which occurred after the Adjournment of the House last night. You, Sir, had left the Chair, and the Mace had been removed, but a considerable number of Members remained in the House. Political feeling was very high, and taunts were exchanged between Members upon both sides of the House. Under the influence of a momentary loss of self-control, I regret to say that I discharged a missile which struck the First Lord of the Admiralty. As soon as the heat of the moment had passed, I fully realised my action was entirely reprehensible, and returned to the House at a later hour, and, with the assistance of the President of the Local Government Board, I endeavoured to find the First Lord, in order that I might express to him my regret, and ask his pardon. I was unsuccessful in finding him, and I am anxious to take this, the first opportunity, of saying how extremely I regret having lost my temper, and of tendering to the right hon. Gentleman and to the House a full and unreserved apology.
  The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Churchill): I thank the hon. Gentleman for what he has said. I can assure him I have not, nor had I at any time, any personal feeling in the matter, and if I had any personal feeling, the observations ho has thought proper to address to the House would have effectually removed it.

QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Earl WINTERTON: I desire to raise a question of privilege. It has reference to an article which appeared in the "Daily Chronicle" newspaper this morning. The words on which I desire to ask whether a breach of privilege has not in fact been committed are:—
"They (the Tories) had come back from dinner flown with insolence and wine."
The only possible meaning to be attached to these words, which, as it happens, are a misquotation from Milton's "Paradise Lost"—the only possible meaning to be attached to the words "flown with wine" is that hon. Members on this side of the House were intoxicated, and I desire to ask you, Sir, whether a very serious breach of privilege has not been committed by that newspaper bringing against those who sit on this side of the House what is an absolute and a foul slander.
Mr. SPEAKER: As the words were read out by the Noble Lord, I confess I was
2090
unable to attach a meaning to the word "flown." I do not understand the words "flown with wine." Anybody who was here yesterday would be able to say there was no truth whatever in the statement. However regrettable the scene may have been, everybody will agree that that, at any rate, is not a correct account of what happened. The account is very highly coloured, and is also inaccurate and untrue. I think, in these circumstances, the matter might be dropped.
Earl WINTERTON: I am very much obliged to you, Sir.

INDIA OFFICE (SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES).
4.0 P.M.
Address for "Return showing the Superannuation and Retired Allowances relating to the India Office payable on the 31st day of March, 1912."—[Mr. MacCallum Scott.]

GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND BILL.

  RESCISSION OF AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION, MR. SPEAKER'S SUGGESTION.
  Mr. SPEAKER: Before calling upon the Prime Minister to move the Motion which stands in his name, I propose to make a suggestion to the House. It is rather unusual, perhaps, for the Speaker to intervene in a case of this kind, but the circumstances in which we stand to-day are somewhat unusual. I think nobody in this House would desire to see a repetition of the scenes which occurred yesterday. I do not know that it is necessary for me to further refer to them. It must be evident to the whole House that the proposals the Prime Minister made yesterday were met with very strong feeling on the part of the Opposition, and it was felt by them that an entirely new course was being adopted in order to remedy a wrong, if wrong there be. I cannot help thinking that if the House had an opportunity of rather more consideration of the circumstances under which we stand, and of the position in which the parties respectively are in regard to this matter, another solution of the difficulty might be found more in accordance with the old precedents which have governed this House, and would not

  2091
  create or set up a new precedent. I do not think this would be a proper opportunity for me to state to the House what the suggestion is that I have to make. That can better be done by private consultation; but I venture to suggest humbly to the House that before we renew a discussion of these matters, the House should take a little further time for consideration, and that those who are charged with submitting to the House a proposal in order to get over the difficulties which have occurred should be given a somewhat longer time for consultation and preparation. I believe I am supposed to be the Moderator of this Assembly, and it is my desire, whilst maintaining the rights of the majority, at the same time to act as the Protector of the liberties of the minority. Therefore, it is only in that sense that I venture to make the suggestion to the House, and I must leave it to the House to decide whether or not the suggestion which I make is a reasonable one. I need only add, of course, that if the House thinks fit not to proceed to-day, the Motion of the Prime Minister will still remain on the Paper, and if no way out of the difficulty is to be found, that Motion would have to be taken up at a future time. I cannot help thinking that a little reflection and consideration of the precedents in the case may lead to a solution of the difficulty which may be acceptable to all sides of the House.
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): The intervention which you have just made in our proceedings is, as you have said, somewhat unusual, but I am perfectly certain that nobody on either side of the House will be prepared to dispute its propriety and justice. You are, as you have said, the Moderator in our Debates; you are the trustee of the rights of both sides of the House and of the best traditions of Parliament. For the maintenance of those rights the majority of to-day may become the minority of to-morrow, just as the minority of to-day may become the majority of to-morrow, and therefore every section of the House is equally interested. There should be no breach of continuity of our substantial traditions to which this House owes its great authority amongst
  2092
  the representative institutions of the world. I think that is an aspiration shared by everyone in this House. If I may venture to say so, I think you have rightly interpreted the duties and responsibilities of your great position, and in view of what has happened, I make this appeal to both sides of the House. Without expressing any opinion—of course, I should like to have time for consideration—one way or the other as to what the ultimate issue of the deliberations may be, I am not only prepared, but I welcome, on behalf of the Government and of those who sit on this side of the House, the appeal you have made to us. I shall, therefore, in consonance with the general wish of the House, in order that full effect may be given to that appeal, and that it may be possible that some solution may be arrived at which may meet, I will not say with general acceptance, but which may lead to a satisfactory issue of the difficulties with which we are faced, for that purpose, in deference to the appeal you have made, move, "That this House do now adjourn until Monday next."
  Mr. BONAR LAW: Mr. Speaker, I only rise to express my concurrence in all that has fallen from the Prime Minister. I should like, if I can do so with respect, to say that in my opinion the responsibility which you have assumed on this occasion adds, if that be possible, to the feeling of respect which is entertained for you by every Member of the House.
  Question put, "That this House do now adjourn until Monday next."
  Mr. KING: Are we at liberty to discuss the position upon this Motion? I suppose we are.
  Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is at liberty to discuss it, but he might exercise his discretion whether he thinks it advisable or not. Of course, if anything eventuates from the suggestion I have made the hon. Member will have full opportunity.
  Mr. KING: After your appeal, Sir, lam quite willing to defer to a later occasion any remarks I may have to make. I may say the position—[HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down."]
  Question, "That this House do now Adjourn till Monday next,"—[The Prime Minister]—put, and agreed to.
  Adjourned accordingly, at One minute after Four o'clock, till Monday next, 18th November.

PETITIONS PRESENTED DURING THE WEEK.
The following Petitions were presented during the week and ordered to lie upon the Table:—

MONDAY.
Established Church (Wales) Bill—Petitions against, from Aberdean Park, Highbury, Ab Kettleby, Accrington (five), Addiscombe, Alexton, All Cannings, Alton Barnes, Altrincham, Anstey, Anston, Arksey, Armthorpe, Ashby Folville, Ashfordby, Ashby de la Zouch, Ashby Parva, Ashby Magna, Ashton on Mersey, Avebury, Aylestone, Aylestone Park, Balby, Balderstone, Bamber Bridge (four), Barford, Barlestone, Barnby Dun, Barnsbury, Barrow upon Soar, Barwell, Bawtry with Austerfield, Baxenden, Beeby, Belgrave, Belton, Billesdon, Blaby, Blackburn (fifteen), Blaston St. Giles, Bollington (two), Bolton on Dearne, Bottesford, Branston by Belvoir, Bromham, Bruntingthorpe, Budbrooke, Burbage, Cantley, Canonbury (two), Carrington, Castle Donington, Catthorpe, Charlecote, Cheadle, Chesterton, Chirton, Church Kirk, Church Langton, Claybrooke, Clayton le Moors, Coalville, Cold Newton, Cold Overton, Cole Orton, Collingbourne Ducis, Collingbourne Kingston, Conisbrough, Coptoak, Cosby, Cossington, Cotesbach, Coston, Croydon (ten), Darwen (six), Dennington, Devizes, Doncaster, Donisthorpe, Dunham Massey, Eaderby, Earl Shilton, Easton Royal, East Kennett, Edlington, Edmonthorpe, Ellistown, Erlestoke, Everley, Evington, Feniscowles, Fenniscliffe, Fenny Drayton, Fifield Bavant, Finningley, Fishlake, Fittleton, Fosbury, Foston, Foxton,

2129
Frisby on the Wreake, Frickley, Froxfield, Gaddesby, Gaulby cum Frisby, Gatley, Glenfield, Glenn Magna, Glenn Parva with South Wigston, Glooston, Goadby, Great Bowden, Great Cheverell, Great Dalby, Grafton, Grimston, Gumley, Hale, Halifax (ten), Ham, Hampole, Harby, Haseley, Hatfield, Hathern, Hatton, Higham on the Hill, Highbury, Highbury Vale, Highgate (three), High Lane, High Leigh, Hickleton, Hinckley, Hoby, Hoddesden, Holy Trinity (Stroud Green), Holloway (two), Homerton, Hooton Pagnell, Horninghold, Hornsey (two), Houghton on the Hill, Hugglescote, Huish, Huncote, Hungarton, Ibstock, Islington (six), Kegworth, Keyham, Kincote and Walton, King's Norton, Kirk Bramwith, Kirk Sandal, Kirby Bellars, Kirby Mallory, Kirby Muxloe, Kibworth, Knossington, Langho, Laughton, Laughton en le Morthen with Thorpe, Leamington Priors, Leicester (nine), Leire, Little Dalby, Lockington cum Hemington, Long Whatton, Longridge, Loughborough (two), Lower Darwen, Ludgershall, Lutterworth, Market Bosworth (two), Market Lavington, Manningford Abbas, Marlborough (two), Measham, Medbourne cum Holt, Mellor, Melton Mowbray, Melton on the Hill, Mexborough, Mildmay Park, Misterton, Moreton Morrell, Mountsorrel, Nailstone, Nether Braughton, Newbold Pacey, Newfoundpool, Newton Linford, Norbury, Normanton le Heath, North Evington, North Kilworth, North Tidworth, Norwood, Oadby, Ogbourne (two), Old Dalby, Osgathorpe, Oswald-twistle (two), Packington, Peatling Magna, Peckleton, Pickwell, Potterne, Poulshot, Preshute, Prestwold, Purley, Queeniborough, Quorn, Ramsbury, Ratby, Ratcliff on Wreak, Ravenstone, Rearsby, Redmile, Ribchester, Ringway, Rishton, Rolleston, Rossington, St. Albans, South Denaby Main, St. Pancras, Saddington, Sale (two), Salesbury, Sambsbury, Sapcote, Savernake (two), Saxby, Saxelbye, Scraptoft, Seagrave, Shackerstone, Shalbourne, Sharnford, Shawell, Sheepy, Shepshed, Sherbourne, Shenton, Sidstone, Sileby, Shirley, Somerby, South Croxton, South Croydon (two), South Kilworth, South Marston, Stainton, Stainforth, Stockport (two), Stonton Wyville, Stert, Stoney Stanton, Sutton Cheney, Sykehouse, Syston (two), Tickhill, Thaddingworth, Thelwell, Thorne, Thornton, Thornton Heath, Thrussington, Thurlaston, Thurnby cum Sloughton, Tockholes, Todwick, Tufnell Park (two),
2130
Twyford, Upavon, Upper Holloway (two), Urchfont, Wales, Waltham, Wanlip, Warborough, Warmsworth, Warwick (three), Wellesbourne, West Croydon, West Holloway, West Lavington, Whetstone, Wigston Magna, Wilcot, Willoughby Waterley, Winterbourne Bassett, Withcote and Owston, Woodborough, Woodhouse Eaves, Woodsetts, Woodside, Wootton Rivers, Worton and Marston, Wymondham, and York (twenty-four).

TUESDAY.
Established Church (Wales) Bill—Petitions against, from Aberford, Addrington, Ainsdale, Aldrington, Almondbury, Altcar, Altofts, Alverthorpe Ardsley, Ardwick, Armitage Bridge, Ashurst, Ashworth, Barcombe, Bardsey, Barnsley (three), Barrowford, Barwick-in-Elmet, Belfield, Beswick and Manchester, Birchencliffe, Birkdale (two), Blundellsands, Boston Spa, Bradley, Bramham, Brayton, Briercliffe, Brierfield, Broadwater, Broadwater Down, Bury St. Edmunds (three), Cawood, Cawthorne, Chapelthorpe, Chatburn, Cheetham (two), Chorlton-on-Medlock (two), Church Fenton, Cliffe Lewes, Clifford, Clitheroe, Collingham, Colne (two), Crofton, Crosland Moor, Cumberworth, Dalton, Darfield, Darton, Dearnley, Downham, East Keswick, Edburton and Fulking, Emley, Falinge, Farnley Tyas, Felkirk, Fence-in-Pendle, Formby (two), Foulridge, Garforth, Gawler, Golcar, Goring-by-Sea, Great Crosby (two), Grimethorpe, Haddlesey, Hamer, Harpurhey (two), Harwood, Healey, Heene, Hemsworth, Henfield, Holmfirth, Holmsbridge, Horbury, Horbury Junction, Hoyland Swaine, Huddersfield (seven), Ipswich (ten), Kingston by Sea, Kirkby Wharf, Kirk Deighton, Kirkheaton, Lancing Lepton, Lewes (two), Linthwaite, Little Marsden, Liverpool (eleven), Lockwood, Low Moor, Lydgate, Manchester (nine), Marsden, Meltham, Middlestown, Miles Platting (two), Milnrow, Milnsbridge, Moldgreen, Monk Bretton, Monk Fryston, Netherthong, Newick, NeW Mill, Newtimber, Norden, Normanton, Openshaw, Outwood, Pendleton in Whalley, Penistone, Portslade (two), Portslade by Sea, Princes Park, Pyecombe, Rashcliffe, Royston, Rochdale (three), Ryhill, Ryther, St. Agnes, St. Anne's on Sea, Sabden, Saddleworth, Sandal Magna, Saxton, Scouthead, Selby, Shadwell, Shelley, Sherburn in Elmet, Shoreham by Sea, Short Heath, Silkstone, Slaithwaite, Smallbridge, Sompting, South Crosland, South Mailing, South Milford, Southport

2131
(five), Southwick, Stamborough, Stanley, Steyning, Telscombe with Piddington, Thornton, Thurgoland, Toxteth, Wakefield (eight), Warmfield cum Sharlston, Waterloo (two), Wetherby, Whalley, Whitwood, Whitwood Mere, Wilshaw, Wiston, Wolverhampton (five), Wombwell, Woodhouse, Woodmancote, Worsborough Bridge, Worsthorne; Worthing (three), Wrenthorpe, and Wyke.
Speeches by Public Servants—Petition from Southport, for restraint.

WEDNESDAY.
Established Church (Wales) Bill—Petitions against, from Abbots Langley, Abbotskerswell, Addington, Addlethorpe, Albrighton, Aldfield, Alderbury, Alford, Allenthorpe, Allhallows Hoo, Althorpe, Amcotts, Ampton, Anderby, Anlaby, Anstey (East and West), Austwick, Apsley End, Arkley, Arncliffe, Arsley Kings, Ashby de la Launde, Ashburton, Ashmore, Ashurst, Ashreigney, Ashwell, Astley, Aubourn, Awre, Aylesford, Ayston, Badwell Ash, Bainton, Barbourne, Bardney, Bardwell, Barham, Barkisland, Barlby, Barlings, Barming, Barmston, Barmby, Barmby Moor, Barnoldswick, Barrow, Barrowden, Barton Mills, Bassingham, Bawmber and Great Sturton, Beachley, Beaford, Bearstead, Beeford, Beighton, Bekesbourne, Benniworth, Bentham (two), Bessingby, Bewdley, Bewerley, Beyton, Bichington, Bicker, Bickwithshaw, Bielby, Billinghay, Binbrook, Birchington, Bircle, Birdsall, Birstwith, Bisbrooke, Bishops Fonthill, Bishops Nympton, Bishops Teignton, Bishop Thornton, Bishop Wilton, Blacktoft, Black Torrington, Blandford (two), Blankney, Blean, Blyburgh, Blyton, Bockleton, Bolingbroke, Bolton by Bolland, Bonnington, Borough Bridge, Boughton Monchelsea, Boultham, Bovey Tracey, Bovingdon, Bowerchalke, Boxley, Boxmoor, Bradfield Combust, Bradfield St. George's, Bradfield St. Clare, Bradford Abbas, Brandon, Branston, Brantingham, Bream, Brearton, Bredhurst, Brenchley, Bridford, Bridge, Britford, Broad Chalke, Broadstairs, Broadwas, Broxholme, Bryanstone Street (two), Bubwith, Buch-in-Rusholme, Burcombe, Burford (first portion), Burgh, Burgh-on-Bain, Burham, Burley-on-the-Hill, Burnby, Burnsall, Burton Agnes, Burton-in-Lonsdale, Bury (seven), Burythorpe, Bushey, Butterwick, Buxhall, Caldecote, Caleridge-cum-Nymet Rowland, Camaby, Camberwell (four), Cammeringham, Candlesby, Cann, Canwick, Cantley, Capel, Capel-le-Ferne, Carlton-
2132
le-Moorland, Chagford, Chapel-le-Dale, Chapel St. Leonards, Charleywood, Charlton Kings, Charlton Marshall, Chart Sutton, Cheltenham (eight), Cheriton Bishop, Cherry Willingham, Chettle, Chiddingstone, Childe Okeford, Chillenden, Chilmark, Chislet, Chittlehamholt, Chittlehampton (two), Chudleigh (two), Chudleigh Knighton, Churchill, Cinder ford, Claines, Claines St. George, Clapham, Claxby, Clearwell, Clerkenwell etc., Cliffe at Hoo, Clifton Brighouse, Coolbrookdale, Cobham, Cofton St. Mary, Coley, Collier Street, Colsford, Combeinteignhead, Compton Chamberlayne, Cooling, Copgrove, Corringham, Cottesmore, Cottingham, Covenham, Cowgill, Cowleigh, Cragg Vale, Cranwell, Crediton, Cross Roads cum Lees, Crowle, Croxley Green, Dalehead, Dalham, Dallowgill, Dalton (North), Davenport (three), Dawley, Dawley Parva, Dawlish, Deal (two), Denbury, Denham, Dent, Detling, Devonport, Digby, Dinton with Teffont Magna, Doncaster, Drewsteignton, Driffield, Drinkstone, Dulwich, Dunholme, Dunnington, Dunsford, Dunsforth, East and West Barkwith, East Farleigh, East Keal, East Langdon, East Mailing, East Peckham (two), Eastrington, East Stower, East Teignmouth, Eastville cum Midville, Ebbesbourne, Edenbridge, Edith Weston, Elvington, Elland, Elloughton, Elmstead, Elmswell, English Bicknor, Escrick, Evedon, Ewerby, Exning, Exton, Eythorne, Fakenham Magna, Falbeck, Far Forest, Farnham, Farnham with Scotton, Felsham, Ferriby (North), Fifehead Magdalen, Figheldean, Filleigh, Fisherton Anger, Fitzroy Square, Folkestone, Fontmell Magna, Fordcombe, Fonthill Gifford, Forant, Foxholes, Full Sutton, Fulford, Fulstow, Freckenham, Frindsbury, Friskney, Fulletby, Gainsborough (three), Ganton, Gargrave, Gate Burton, Gazeley, Glaston, Glentworth, Grayingham, Grantham, Greetland, Greetwell, Grewelthorpe, Grimboldby, Grimley, Grindleton, Great Ashfield, Great Berkhamstead, Great Barton, Great and Little Livermere, Great Malvern, Great Mongeham, Great Saxham, Great Torrington, Great Whelnetham, Gillingham, Goodmanham, Goldsborough, Gorsley with Cliffords Mesne, Gorton on the Wolds, Goulceby and Asterby, Gunby, Hackington, Hadlow, Hagworthingham, Hale Magna, Hailing, Hallow, Halton Holegate, Hambleton, Hampsthwaite, Hanley William and Hanley Child, Harbledown, Harpswell, Harrietsham, Harrington, Harrogate (five), Harswell,

2133
Hartwith cum Winsley, Hatfield, Hawkinge (Folkestone), Haworth, Hawstead, Haxey, Hayes, Hayton, Heapham, Hebden Bridge, Helperthorpe, Hemel Hempstead (two), Hemingbrough, Hemingby, Hemswell, Hendlip, Hennock, Hepworth, Herne Bay (two), Heslington, Hessett, Hessle, Hesterton (East), Hesterton (West), Hever, Higham, High Bickington, High Halstow, Highweek, Hildenborough, Hilton, Hinton St. Mary, Hoath, Hogsthorpe, Hollingbourne, Holnest, Holt, Holton le Beckering, Holton le Moor, Holme on Spalding Moore, Hoo St. Werbury, Horringer, Hotham, Hougham, Howden, Howell, Huddington, Huggate, Hulme (nine), Hunmanby, Hunton (two), Huntshaw, Hurst, Huttoft, Hykeham (North), Ibberton cum Belchalwell, Icklingham, Ideford, Ightham, Illingworth, Ingham, Ingleton, Ingoldmells, Ingoldsby, Ingrow cum Hainworth, Ipplepen, Iron Bridge, Isle of Grayne, Iwerne Courtney or Shroton with Farringdon, Iwerne Minster, Jackfield, Keighley (two), Kelbrook, Kelstern, Kempsey, Kensal Green, Kentford, Ketley, Ketton, Kibbesford, Kidderminster (three), Kildwick, Kilham, Kilnwick Percy, Kingsdown, Kingkerswell, King's Langley, King's Teignton, Kingston, Kingston Deverill, Kington Magna, Kiikby Malhaundale, Kirkby Overblow, Kirk Hammerton, Kirkmanshulme, Kirby Underdale, Kirton Lindsay, Knaith, Knapton, Knaresborough (two), Knighton on Terne, Knowlton, Knowstone, Kyre Wyard, Lackford, Lakenheath, Lamberhurst, Landford, Langham, Langcliffe, Langleybury, Langton, Langton by Wragby, Langton Green, Langton juxta Partney, Langton Long (Blandford), Langtree, Lapford, Langham, Laughton, Laverstock, Lawley, Lea, Leaderham, Leasingham, Leavesden, Leckhampton, Leeds and Broomfield, Legbourne and Cawthorpe, Leigh, Leighton, Lenham, Leybourne, Lightcliffe, Linwood, Little Carlton, Little Casterton, Little Dean, Little Gaddesden, Little Mongeham, Little Ouseburn, Little Saxham, Little Torrington, Little Whelnethan, Little Witley, Lofthouse, Londesborough, Long Burton with Leweston, Longhope, Long Preston, Longsight, Louth, Lower Hardres, Low Moor, Lowthorpe, Luddendenfoot, Luddington, Ludford, Lusby, Lustleigh Lydbrook, Lydden, Lyddington, Lydlinch, Lympne, Lyndon, Mablethorpe, Maddington, Malins Lee in Dawley, Malvern (two), Malvern Wells, Mamble cum Bayton, Manaton, Manby, Manchester
2134
(two), Manton, Marnhull, Mariensleigh, Mareham le Fen, Martley, Marton, Market Deeping, Market Overton, Market Rasen, Market Weighton, Market Weston, Margate (three), Marshchapel, Marton cum Grafton, Martons Both, Matfield, Melbury Abbas, Mere, Meshaw, Metheringham, Middleton on the Wolds, Midhope, Mildenhall, Millington, Mill End, Milton Abbas, Motcombe and Enmore Green, Monewden, More, Morchard Bishop, Morton, Moreton-hampstead, Moss Side (two), Moulton, Mumby St. Peter, Mytton, Nafferton, Navenby, Nettlestead, New Brompton, Newent, Newland (two), Newmarket, Newnham, Newport, Newton St. Cyres, New Sleaford, Newton Heath (two), Newton on Trent, Nomington, Norland, Northbourne, North Bovey, Northchurch, North Cotes, Northorpe, Northowran, North Somercotes, North Thoresby, Norton (two), Norton Disney, Notting Hill and other places, Nowton, Nunburnholme, Nunhead, Nun Monkton, Nunstead with Ifield, Oakengates (two), Oakham, Oakworth, Ogwell, Okeford Fitzpaine, Orcheston, Otham, Ovenden, Owersby, Owmby, Owston Ferry, Oxenhall, Oxenhope, Oxhey, Paddock Wood, Paddington (six), Pateley Bridge, Pauntley, Payntington, Pembury, Penshurst, Petham, Petrockston, Pickworth, Pilham, Pimperne, Platt, Pocklington, Ponghill, Postling, Potter Hanworth, Powick, Preston (two), Preston on the Weald Moors, Prior's Lee, Paddington, Rackenford, Raithby, Ramsgate (four), Ranby, Ranceby, Rand with Fulnetby, Rattlesden, Reculver (two), Redlynch, Relpham, Revesby, Riccall, Ridlington, Rillington, Ringwould, Ripon, Ripple, Ripponden, Risby, Riseholme, River, Roccliffe, Rock, Rose Ash, Rougham, Rudstone, Ruskington Rusthall, Ryarch, Rylstone, Salmonby, Salsby with Thoresthorpe, Sandford, Sandford Orcas, Sansthorpe, Sapeston, Sarratt, Sawley, Saxilby Ingleby, Scarle, North, Scamblesby cum Crewkerne, Scanton, Scathorne, Scotton (two), Scredington, Scrivelsby, Scrunby, Seaton Ross, Sedbergh, Sellinge, Semley, Settle, Settrington, Shadingfield, Shaldon, Sheffield, Shelf, Shebbear, Sherburn, Shilling Okeford, Shipbourne, Shipley (two), Shipton Thorpe, Shobrooke, Shorne, Shrawley, Shrewsbury, (ten), Shrewton, Sibertswold, Silton, Skendleby, Skellingthorpe, Skelton cum Newby, Skirpenbeck, Skipton (two), Skipwith, Skidby, Slaidburn, Snelland, Sotby, South Hampstead, South and North Kyme, South Luffenham, South Molton,

2135
South Newton, South Ormesby, South Somercotes, South Thoresby, Southwark, Sowerby Bridge, Sowerby Halifax (three), Spetchley, Springthorpe, Stainforth, Stanford (two), Stanningfield, Stamford Bridge, Stansted, Stanton, Staple, Starbeck, Staunton, Staveley, Staverton, Stedmere, Steeton, Stelling, Stickford, Stillingfleet, Stirchley, Stixwould, Stockbury, Stockleigh English, Stockleigh Pomeroy, Stockwith, Stoke (two), Stokesay, Stoke Wake, Stoulton, Stourton Caundle, Stourpaine, Stow (two), Stowlangtoft, Stratford sub Castle, Strubby, Sturminster Newton, Sturry, St. Briavels, St. Giles in the Wood, St. George's, St. Lawrence, St. Marylebone (five), Sudbrooke, Sunnyside, Sutton Mandeville, Sutton Valence, Swalecliffe, Swanland, Swaton, Swineshead, Tathwell, Tarrant Hinton, Tarrant Keynston, Tarrant Monkton with Tarrant Launceston, Tarrant Rawston, Taynton, Taynton Huntley and Longhope, Tealby, Teigh, Teingrace, Temple Bruer, Temple Ewell, Tenbury (two), Tetney, Thanet (two), Theddlethorpe, (two), Thelbridge, Thelnetham, Thimbleby, Thistleton, Thixendale, Thorganby (two), Thornton, Thornton-in-Londale, Thorpebassett, Thorpe-on-the-Hill, Threekingham, Thurlby-by-Newark, Thurnham, Thurston, Tibberton, Tidenham, Tilmanstone, Timberland, Tinwell, Tisbury, Tixover, Tollard Royal, Tonbridge, Torbryan, Torksey, Tostock, Tovil, Toynton, Troston, Trottiscliffe, Trusthorpe, Tuddenham St. Mary, Tunbridge Wells (five), Turnworth, Upleadon, Upnor, Upper Arley, Upper Hardres, Upton Snodsbury, Upton Helions, Utterby, Waddington, Wainfleet (two), Walmer, Walsham-le-Willows, Wansford, Wardley, Warkleigh, Warndon, Washford Pyne, Watford (two), Watton, Weaverthorpe, Welbourn, Wellington, Welton, Welton-le-Marsh, Westbere, Westbury-on-Severn, West Dean cum East Grimstead, West Ella and Willerby, West Farleigh, West Grimstead, West Herts, West Keal, West Malling, West Malvern, West Peckham, West Stow, West Teignmouth, West Vale (Halifax), Weston Lullingfield, Wetheringsett, Wetwang, Wheldrake, Whissendine, White Ladies Aston, Whitstable, Wibsey, Wickenford, Widecombe in the Moor, Wigginton, Wilberfoss, Willerby, Willoughton, Wilsford, Wilton, Windhill, Winkleigh, Winksley cum Groatley, Winterbourne Anderson, Winterbourne Earls, Winterbourne Gunner, Winterbourne Houghton, Winterbourne Stickland, Winterbourne Whitechurch,
2136
Winterbourne Zelstone, Winteringham, Winterslow, Winthorpe, Wishford, Witley, Wolborongh, Wold Newton, Woodford, Woodhall Spa, Woodnesborough, Woodside, Woolaston, Woolland, Woolpit, Wooton St. Martin, Worlington (East and West), Wressle, Wroot, Wrotham, Wrockwardine, Yalding, Yarborough, Yarnscombe, Yatham, Yedingham, Viney Hill (two), and Zeal Monachorum.

THURSDAY.
Established Church (Wales) Bill—Petitions against, from Alderton, Alderwasley, Aldridge, Alfreton, Alverstoke, Anstey, Ashchurch, Ashford, Ashover, Ashleworth, Aston, Atlow, Ault Hucknall, Avenbury, Aymestrey, Ayot St. Peter's, Bakewell, Baldock, Balham, Barlow, Basingstoke, Baslow, Beeley, Belper (two), Berkeley, Biggin by Hartington, Bishop's Cleeve, Bishopstone, Bitterne, Bitterne Park, Blakemere, Blakenall Heath, Blackwell, Bloxwich, Bodenham, Bolsterstone, Bonsall, Botley, Brackenfield, Bradfield, Bradley, Brampton, Brampton Bierlow, Brassington, Bredwardine, Brilley, Brimfield, Brimington, Brobury, Brockworth, Buckland, Bursledon, Bush Hill Park (two), Byford, Caldmore, Walsall, Calow Chapeltown, Chatham (three), Chelmorton, Chesterfield (two), Church Broughton, Churchdown, Clay Cross, Chiddesden, Clifford, Clifton, Clothall, Cove, Cradley, Crich, Croft with Yarpole, Crofton, Cromford, Crondall, Crookham, Cubley, Damerham, Darlaston (two), Datchworth, Darley (two), Dethick, Digswell, Didbrook, Dilwyn, Dorstone, Doveridge, Duffield, Dummer, Eardisland, Earlsfield, Eastrop and District, Eastleigh, Ecclesfield, Edensor, Edmonton (seven), Edvin Loach cum Tedstone Wafer, Elsecar, Elseer, Elson, Elton, Elvetham, Emsworth, Enfield (six), Eversley, Evesbatch, Eyam (two), Eyton, Eareham (two), Fenny Bentley, Fleet, Forty Hill, Forthampton, Freemantle, Friern Barnet (two), Fretherne, Gillingham, Gosport (two), Graveley, Great Witcomb, Great Barr (two), Grenoside, Hampstead (three), Handsworth (two), Handsworth Woodhouse, Hannington, Harborne, Hardwicke (two), Haresfield, Hartington, Hartpury, Hartley Wintney, Hatfield, Hathersage, Hasfield, Hasland, Havant, Hawley, Hawling, Hayling Island, Hazelwood and Shottle, Heage, Heath, Heckfield, Hedge End, Herriard, Highnam, Hinton on the Green, Hitchin (two), Hognaston, Hook with

2137
Waisash, Holbrook, Hormead, Hound, Hucclecote, Hulland, Idridgehay, Ironville, Itchen, Kemerton, Kimbolton, Kimpton, Kingsland, Kings Pyon with Birley, Kings Walden, Kington, Kirk Treaton, Knill, Kniveton, Laxton, Leckhampton, Leigh, Leinthall Earles, Leintwardine, Letchworth, Letton, Leysters, Lilley, Little Eaton, Little Hereford, Lockes Heath, Longford, Longstone, Long Sutton, Lower Ginting, Lucton, Luton, Lyonshall, Mapleton, Marston Montgomery, Marston on Dove, Matlock, Matlock Bank, Matlock Bath, Matson, Middleton by Wirks North, Middleton on the Hill, Minsterworth, Moccas, Monken Hadley, Monk Sherborne cum Pamber, Monyash, Mortimer West End, Mortley, Morton, Much Cowarne, Netley, Newbold, Newnham, Norbury (Derby), North Walham, North Wingfield, Norton (two), Norton Canon, Oakley, Odiham, Old Basing, Orleton, Oxenton, Oxford (eight), Palmer's Green, Pelsall, Pencombe, Pilsley, Pirton, Porchester, Preston on Wye, Puddleston, Purbrook, Putney, Ramsdell, Redhill, Ridgeway, Rowledge, Rowner, Rowsley, Royston, Rudford, Rushall, Sandhurst, Sarisbury, Sarnesfield, Scropton with Foston, Scar-
2138
cliffe, Stratfield Turgis, Sheffield (eight), Sheldon, Shephall, Sherborne St. John, Sherfield on Loddon, Shirland, Shurdington, Silchester, Snelston, Somercotes, Somersall Herbert, South Cave, Southfields (Wandsworth), Southgate, South Thirksey, South Normanton, South Stoneham (two), Southwick, Stanford Bishop, Stannington, Stanton, St. Ippolyts, Stratfieldsaye, Streatham (four), Stretford, Sudbury, Sutton on the Hill, Swindon, Tadley, Taddington, Tankersley, Tansley, Tedstone Delamere, Temple Guiting, Tewkesbury, Therfield, Thorpe, Throcking, Tibshelf, Tichfield, Tideswell, Tipton, Titley, Tuffley, Tunworth, Turnditch, Twigworth, Twyning, Ullinsgwick, Up Hatherley, Upper Langwith, Upton Grey, Walden, Walton Cardiff, Walton on Trent, Walsall Wood, Warblington, Wath upon Dearne, Weeke, Wentworth, Weston (two), Weston Patrick, Wessington, Westend, Wigmore, Wickham, Winchcombe, Winchester (ten), Winchfield, Wincobank, Winforton, Wingerworth, Winslade, Wirksworth, Woolston, Wooton St. Lawrence, Whitbourne, Whitminster, Whitney, Wyddial, Wymering, Yateley, and Yeaveley.

NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.
  EXCISE OFFICERS (REMUNERATION).
  EXCISE OFFICERS (REMUNERATION).
  WHOLE-TIME SERVICE.
  WHOLE-TIME SERVICE.
  MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS (PANEL).
  MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS (PANEL).
  HEALTH COMMITTEES (WORKING CLASS REPRESENTATIVES).
  HEALTH COMMITTEES (WORKING CLASS REPRESENTATIVES).
  WELSH INSURANCE COMMISSION (APPOINTMENTS).
  WELSH INSURANCE COMMISSION (APPOINTMENTS).
  ST. HELENS COMMITTEE.
  ST. HELENS COMMITTEE.
  TUBERCULOUS PATIENTS.
  TUBERCULOUS PATIENTS.
  COAL MINERS (ACCIDENTS).
  COAL MINERS (ACCIDENTS).
  SANATORIA (IRELAND).
  SANATORIA (IRELAND).
  SANATORIUM BENEFIT.
  SANATORIUM BENEFIT.
  CONTRIBUTIONS.
  CONTRIBUTIONS.
  Customs Second Officers (Allowance).
  Customs Second Officers (Allowance).
  Spirits (Illicit Production).
  Spirits (Illicit Production).
  Staffing Committee (Report).
  Staffing Committee (Report).
  Civil Service (Boy Clerks).
  Civil Service (Boy Clerks).
  Revenue (Ireland).
  Revenue (Ireland).
  Motor Cars (Commercial Use).
  Motor Cars (Commercial Use).
  Nurseries and Market Gardens (Site Values).
  Nurseries and Market Gardens (Site Values).
  Road Board (Scotland).
  Road Board (Scotland).
  Income Tax Assessment.
  Income Tax Assessment.
  Imperial and Local Taxation.
  Imperial and Local Taxation.
  Income Tax (Ireland).
  Income Tax (Ireland).
  Piers and Harbours (Ireland).
  Piers and Harbours (Ireland).
  Old Age Pensions.
  Old Age Pensions.
  Reinstatement Applications (Ireland).
  Reinstatement Applications (Ireland).
ROYAL NAVY.
  NEW CONSTRUCTION.
  NEW CONSTRUCTION.
  RATINGS.
  RATINGS.
  Army Audit Board.
  Army Audit Board.
  Ration Allowance (Southern Command).
  Ration Allowance (Southern Command).
  Special Reserve Battalions.
  Special Reserve Battalions.
  South Africa Garrison.
  South Africa Garrison.
  National Reserve.
  National Reserve.
  Tideswell School (Derbyshire).
  Tideswell School (Derbyshire).
  Public Elementary Schools (Admission).
  Public Elementary Schools (Admission).
  Register of Teachers.
  Register of Teachers.
  King's College.
  King's College.
  Port-of-Spain.
  Port-of-Spain.
  Delhi (Planning).
  Delhi (Planning).
  Purchase of Silver (India).
  Purchase of Silver (India).
  Government of India (Air Service).
  Government of India (Air Service).
  India Loan Securities.
  India Loan Securities.
  Cairo City Police.
  Cairo City Police.
  Stone Workhouse.
  Stone Workhouse.
  Vaccinating Officers.
  Vaccinating Officers.
  Board of Trade (Staff Posts).
  Board of Trade (Staff Posts).
  Marconi Agreement.
  Marconi Agreement.
  House of Commons.
  House of Commons.
  Postal Pillar-Boxes (Destruction of Letters).
  Postal Pillar-Boxes (Destruction of Letters).
  W. G. Brown (Auxiliary Postman).
  W. G. Brown (Auxiliary Postman).
  Telegraph Learners.
  Telegraph Learners.
  East Anglian Floods (Special Telegraphists).
  East Anglian Floods (Special Telegraphists).
  Foot-and-Mouth Disease.
  Foot-and-Mouth Disease.
  Board of Agriculture Journal (Advertisements).
  Board of Agriculture Journal (Advertisements).
  Floods (Assistance to Farmers).
  Floods (Assistance to Farmers).
  National Land Bank.
  National Land Bank.
  Norfolk Coast Fishery (Destruction of Nets).
  Norfolk Coast Fishery (Destruction of Nets).
  Sunninghill Fuel Allotment Trust.
  Sunninghill Fuel Allotment Trust.
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
Brought from the Commons.

NORFOLK FISHERIES PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL. (No. 165.)
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 15) BILL. (No. 166.)
MARRIAGES PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL. (No. 167.)
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.

NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT, 1911.
Regulations, dated 11th November, 1912, made by the Insurance Commissioners, the Irish Insurance Commissioners, and the Welsh Insurance Commissioners, entitled the National Health Insurance (Naval and Military Forces) (Time Limits) Regulations, 1912: Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and to be printed. (No. 168.)
LAND DRAINAGE (BRAITHWAITE MOSS) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
PROTECTION OF ANIMALS ACT (1911) AMENDMENT BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without amendment, and to be read 3a on Wednesday the 27 th instant.

TERRITORIAL RECRUITING AREAS.
THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH*THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH rose to move to resolve, "That in the opinion of this House the recruiting areas originally allotted to the various counties for the raising of the Territorial Force should not be affected by any extension of county boundaries not contemplated at the inception of the scheme, in view of the fact that on those areas the proportion of the Force to be raised by each county was calculated, and that in those areas the respective counties have up till now been recruiting."
The noble Earl said: My Lords, this matter arises out of the Act which was passed last year extending the boundaries of Birmingham. That Act has had a considerable effect on the recruiting areas of three counties—Warwickshire, Worcestershire, and
Staffordshire. Handsworth, which was in Staffordshire and now goes to Warwickshire, is a very important district, and in that area we raise four units representing three different kinds of arms—one Infantry, two Army Service Corps, and a Field Ambulance. I would remind your Lordships that under the original scheme the country was divided into six principal commands, and within those six commands were ten grouped regimental districts in which various counties were placed. Each of these grouped regimental districts had its full proportion of the various arms—Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery of various sorts, Engineers, Army Service Corps, and so on. To each county, of course, was allotted the proportion of the Force it was supposed to be able to raise; but the passing of the Extension of Birmingham Act and the transfer of Handsworth to Warwickshire has, as I say, considerably affected Staffordshire.
One point to which I should like to call particular attention is the fact that it was from a letter written by Colonel Brade from the War Office on August 21, 1912, we received the first intimation that the various County Associations were to deal with this matter themselves. I think I have reason to complain, because the Royal Assent was given to the Birmingham Act as long ago as June 2, 1911, and realising to the full that we in Staffordshire would be considerably prejudiced by the passing of that Extension Act I went myself to the War Office nearly two years before the Act came into force to call their attention to the fact and to beg them to take some steps to prevent any possible friction between the counties in consequence. In his letter Colonel Brade refers to the fact that a strict adherence to regulations would require the transfer of the administration of the units to the Warwickshire County Association, and in order to avoid unnecessary disturbance he suggested that we should make arrangements with the Warwickshire Association. That was, as I say, the first intimation we received that we would have to deal with the matter.
I would like to ask the representative of the War Office what would have happened supposing there had been strict adherence to the regulations and supposing we, as we would have been perfectly justified in doing, had declined the responsibility of raising four units in another county. Why, our action would have dislocated the whole of this scheme. Because if you look at the position you will find that Staffordshire is in the sixth grouped regimental district. It marches on the west with Salop and Cheshire, which are in the fourth grouped regimental district, and on the south with Warwickshire and Worcestershire, which are in the seventh. Therefore if we had declined the responsibility there would have been four units, representing three separate arms, transferred from Staffordshire to Warwickshire, which means that the sixth grouped regimental district would have been representatives of three arms short, while in the seventh grouped regimental district these arms would have been duplicated, which would have entirely destroyed the original scheme, and, I gather, would have made it impossible to carry on. I may say that, as far as Warwickshire, Worcestershire, and Staffordshire are concerned, we have arranged our difficulties, but it has given us a considerable amount of labour, and what I wish to avoid in the future is that it should be left to the respective counties, with all the possibilities of friction, to adjust these matters. I ask in my resolution that the War Office should take upon themselves now to say that no future extension of boundaries shall affect the recruiting areas.
I have had a correspondence with the Secretary of State for War, and there are one or two points in the right hon. gentleman's letter on which I would like to dwell. The Secretary of State says that as the boundaries of Warwickshire have been changed by the Act to which I have referred the sphere of the Warwickshire County Association would, if we took no action, be correspondingly increased. That is exactly what I complain of. It is owing to the inaction of the War Office that the Warwickshire area has been increased and that we proportionately suffer. They left action to us. I suggest to your Lordships that it is not our business to re-arrange recruiting areas. Staffordshire and Worcestershire are very much in the position of the children of Israel in the land of Egypt. In
952
the first instance the genial Pharaoh, who now graces the Woolsack, came down to us and said, "Here is your tale of bricks which you have to complete; the straw will be provided for you to complete your tale." We completed our tale; and then the War Office come down and say, "That, is all very well, but you must keep up your tale of bricks, but we will not provide the straw." That is, I submit, putting us in an unfair position.
The Secretary of State referred to the fact that it would not be fair to Warwickshire to issue orders that they were not to recruit in what was strictly their own area "until we have heard their views." With regard to hearing their views, I suggest that the time to consult the various localities is when the areas are first allotted. There would have been no unfairness to Warwickshire in this instance if that had been done, for Warwickshire and Staffordshire were the first two counties in the whole of the country to complete their establishment. I suggest that the unfairness is not to the county which acquires extra recruiting ground, but to the county which loses it. Another point which was made by the War Office was that they were often attacked for issuing orders without consulting the wishes of the local authorities. There, again, the same argument applies. The time to consult the local authorities was when the original scheme was first introduced.
I urge the noble Lord who represents the War Office to meet me in this matter. I would point out the great tendency there is for the extension of large centres of population. It is happening all over the country, and it is very possible that before long in Staffordshire there will be another question of the extension of an area which may affect the county boundaries, and very possibly it may occur in a locality where there is no room for two Associations. But if the War Office will undertake to do what I suggest there will be no feeling of injury to any one. The trouble comes when you have two neighbouring counties competing for an area where there is not room for both to recruit. This is easily avoidable if a settlement is made before the difficulty arises. We accepted certain responsibilities under certain conditions, and it is not fair to ask us to carry out those responsibilities when the conditions are entirely changed. I beg to make the Motion standing in my name on the Paper.
LORD HERSCHELL: My Lords, in the first place I should like to express regret that the noble Earl who has just spoken should feel himself aggrieved in this matter, and I should like to say, on behalf of the Secretary of State, that nothing could possibly be further either from the desires or from the intentions of the War Office than to cause any grievance to one who has worked so whole-heartedly and in so disinterested a way for the furtherance of the interests of the Territorial Army. I hope, therefore, that if there may appear to have been a disagreement the noble Earl will not think that the services he has rendered have been in any way lost sight of. Before dealing with the specific questions which are before the House, I may also say that it is the earnest desire of the War Office to avoid causing any unnecessary friction between County Associations. That is an object which they would always have in view.
On the general question, as the noble Earl has stated, the legal position is quite clear, and is as follows. Under the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act an Association may be formed for any county, and a county for territorial purposes coincides with the administrative county; and by an Order in Council of March 19, 1908, Section 59 of the Local Government Act of 1888 was applied to the Territorial Force, thus providing that any changes in county boundaries authorised in pursuance of that Act would be recognised for Territorial Force purposes. Accordingly the area within which an Association is appointed to exercise its powers legally alters with any alteration of the county boundaries, and the reasons for this are not far to seek. The whole basis of the territorial organisation being by counties, and Associations being appointed to represent county interests, it is quite obvious that any wide divergence between the areas of County Associations and the areas of administrative counties would tend to confusion and overlapping, not only between neighbouring Associations, but also between the Associations and the civil county authorities. But while legally the County Association area follows the civil boundary of the county, it is at the same time open to the War Office to direct, on administrative grounds, that particular functions of the Association should be exercised over an area which does not coincide with the county boundaries. In particular
954
the War Office may issue directions as to the areas in which Associations should be allowed to recruit, but these directions are matters of administrative convenience and do not affect the legal position.
The recruiting areas allotted to Associations being co-extensive with counties, when a change of county boundaries takes place it is then for the Army Council to decide how the units and detachments of units in the affected areas are to be raised—that is to say, whether they shall remain under the administration of the Association out of whose area they have passed or whether they shall be transferred to the Association into whose area they have passed. It is the view of the War Office that each case where there is a disturbance of county boundaries the case must be considered on its merits, for while, on the one hand, it is obviously necessary to preserve as far as possible a county basis of organisation, at the same time it is inexpedient to disturb existing conditions where such disturbance can be avoided. Such cases as these involve an infinity of local considerations of convenience, of prestige, of local sympathies. Therefore before giving a decision in such matters the War Office hold that it is absolutely essential that the views and wishes of the Associations concerned should be ascertained. They do not consider that it would be possible to lay down in advance a general rule for all future cases of change of county boundaries. That is to say, a general rule which would give no consideration to changes of population or of local conditions.
With regard to the particular case of the Birmingham area, in 1910 the Local Government Board made a Provisional Order for the enlargement of the boundaries of the borough of Birmingham, and as that borough is reckoned within the county of Warwick the effect was to transfer certain districts from Staffordshire and from Worcestershire to Warwickshire. The Bill was passed in June of last year, and the first communication, I believe, that was received direct from an Association by the War Office was in the middle of December of last year. A considerable delay then occurred owing to certain difficulties in collecting the necessary facts, and also the War Office were of opinion that, while it

955
was obviously necessary that a decision should be come to in due course, it was not specially necessary for hurried intervention so long as no difficulties arose between the Associations. But having collected these facts it became evident that the general principle hitherto followed, that Associations should administer all the operations of units within their own county areas, was contravened in several instances, and that such contravention was likely to lead to confusion in administration generally and particularly in recruiting. Difficulties were also foreseen to be possible through the overlapping of civil representatives of Associations on the question of police jurisdiction, nursing committees, National Reserve registration, and other points, all of which points, in the opinion of the War Office, would be much more obvious to those actually concerned in the local administration than they would be to the War Office. Therefore, before deciding whether any transfer of units should or should not be made, a letter was sent to the three Associations concerned pointing out the position under the Act, and asking them to confer and to recommend a solution which would be mutually satisfactory. This solution, I understand, has actually been arrived at in the present case. But as regards the whole position of the matter the point of view of the War Office is that in these questions the local conditions can only really be properly ascertained by obtaining the views of the various Associations concerned, and it is, therefore, essential that the Associations concerned should in the first instance consider and discuss the matter to see whether any arrangement could not be come to. Obviously if no arrangement could be come to then the War Office must take such measures as appear necessary, but at the same time they would assist in every way the County Associations in arriving at some conclusion.
With regard to the actual Motion on the Paper, the War Office feel that they cannot tie their hands for the future, but must preserve the right to decide a matter of administration in accordance with the merits of each case. While it is only logical to preserve as far as possible a close co-relation between the county areas and the recruiting areas, as the whole organisation of the Territorial Force is based on counties, at the same time practical considerations of administration
956
may make it undesirable in special cases to interfere with pre-existing recruiting arrangements. I fear that the Government are unable to accept the Motion of the noble Earl as it stands on the Paper, and I venture to think that possibly your Lordships may hesitate in accepting the Motion in view of the fact that you would thereby be binding yourselves to retain indefinitely the same recruiting areas as were instituted, in the original Act. I do not know whether j the noble Earl might think it worth while to alter his Resolution and with the object of placing on record the protest which he has made. If it would meet his views to alter it by omitting all the words after "scheme," and inserting the words "without consultation with the County Associations concerned," then the Government would be quite prepared to accept that amended Resolution. But as it stands the Government would have to resist the Motion.
THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH: I hope my noble friend will allow me to thank him for the full and clear explanation he has given, and I hope he does not think that I merely raised this question on personal grounds. I raised it because it is a matter which affects the Territorial Force generally. I own that the announcement which the noble Lord has made that the Territorial Force Act was put under the Local Government Act, 1888, does alter the circumstances, and I do not know that I should have raised the question at all if I had been aware of that. I endeavoured as far as I could to find out what Acts did affect the Territorial Force, and that is one which was overlooked. Therefore I am quite willing to adopt the noble Lord's suggestion and omit all the words after the word "scheme" and accept the words which he proposes in their place. I make the Motion in that form.
Moved to resolve, That in the opinion of this House the recruiting areas originally allotted to the various counties for the raising of the Territorial Force should not be affected by any extension of county boundaries not contemplated at the inception of the scheme without consultation with the County Associations concerned.—(The Earl of Dartmouth.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

THE PURCHASE OF SILVER FOR INDIA.
LORD INCHCAPE*LORD INCHCAPE rose to call attention to recent purchases of silver on behalf of the Government of India, and to inquire whether any decision has been reached regarding the coinage of gold in India; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, it is within your Lordships' knowledge that some discussion has recently taken place in regard to a new departure made by the India Office in their system of purchasing silver required for silver coinage in India. As your Lordships are aware, after the Mints in India were closed to the free coinage of silver some nineteen years ago when Lord Lansdowne was Viceroy, the Government undertook to provide until further notice the silver currency required by the public at the price of 1s. 4d. per rupee, or 15 rupees to the pound sterling. To meet the demand for rupee coinage, which cannot conveniently at times be given out of the Currency Note Reserve, the Government are obliged to purchase silver and to coin this silver into rupees precisely as His Majesty's Government in this country do in regard to the silver coinage here. To some small extent it has been possible to buy silver in India, but practically the whole of the silver required for currency in India has had to be purchased on the London market. Up to a few months ago the India Office employed the Bank of England to buy their silver, but recently the purchases appear to have been made through a firm of bullion brokers in the City, and the change of purchasing agent has led to some criticism. I am convinced that the change was only introduced because it was believed that it would be to the advantage of the Indian taxpayer, but I think it would be convenient if the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for India were to explain to your Lordships the circumstances which led him to sanction the change.
To move from silver to gold when the Mints in India were closed to the free coinage of silver the sovereign was made legal tender at the ratio of 15 rupees to the £1 and sonic years ago—in 1901—when Lord Curzon was Viceroy and when Lord George Hamilton was Secretary of State for India, a proposal went from Whitehall to the Government of India, with the approval of the Lords of the
958
Treasury, for the coinage of sovereigns in that country, so that the gold produced in India might be coined there instead of having to be sent home. If my memory does not betray me, the arrangements would have gone through, but the Government of India at that time ascertained that the Indian mining companies preferred, for reasons known to themselves, to send the gold home, and the Government of India were of opinion that there was, therefore, nothing to be gained by establishing a branch of the Royal Mint in Bombay. Looking to the fact that the gold standard had been established in India and that sovereigns and half-sovereigns were legal tender and were beginning to circulate freely throughout the country, I think it was unfortunate that the suggestion made by the Secretary of State in 1901 was not then accepted. It was true, no doubt, that the Indian gold mining companies at the time found it convenient to ship their gold home and that only a small amount of gold at the outside might have been offered for coinage; but seeing that the standard of value had been changed from silver to gold I think it would have been better if facilities had been offered for the free coinage of gold in India. The question of opening the Mints to the coinage of gold has lately been raised again, and I venture to ask the noble Marquess whether there is any likelihood of his being disposed to urge once more on the Government of India, as Lord George Hamilton did, the desirability of giving facilities for the coinage of gold in India. I beg to move.
Moved, for Papers relating to recent purchases of silver on behalf of the Government of India.—(Lord Inchcape.)
LORD SWAYTHLING: My Lords, I think it would be in the interests of the House if I intervened for a moment in this discussion, and in doing so I venture to ask your Lordships to extend to me that kind indulgence which you always extend to Members who address you for the first time. I am sorry that, after a history of business of over sixty years, it is necessary for me to defend my firm against attacks which have been made in the public Press and in the other House of Parliament. Those attacks have been made under various heads. The first and most important is

959
a charge made in several newspapers that my firm has conspired corruptly with my brother, the Under-Secretary for India, to obtain a large order for the purchase of silver for the Indian Government. I would like to state to the House that from first to last my firm has had no correspondence or communication whatsoever with my brother, the Under-Secretary. From the commencement to the end all the orders were conveyed to us from the Secretary of State for India in Council, on which body, I am informed, my brother has no seat, and in connection with whose proceedings he has no vote and is not allowed to speak. The purchases and orders were regulated by the Finance Committee through their Chairman, and I am informed that my brother was never present at a single meeting at which the question of the purchase of silver was discussed, although I believe that technically he has a right to attend. I wish also to state to the House that I have never had a conversation with my brother on Indian finance since he has been Under-Secretary for India except on one occasion when, after the comparative failure of the last Indian Loan, I said to him that I thought it was the duty of the country, when it desired to borrow, to consult the lenders—in other words, that it should go into the market and discover whether long-dated bonds were required by the market and then issue long-dated bonds, or whether the market required short-dated bonds, in which case short-dated bonds should be issued. With this single exception I have never discussed Indian finance with my brother, nor has any member of my firm to my knowledge, and I understand that he has nothing to do, in the way the Office is arranged, with Indian finance of any kind.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Hear, hear.
LORD SWAYTHLING: I need not refer, I think, to the reasons why the order of the India Council was given to my firm. Anything that can be said on that matter the noble Marquess the Leader of the House will be able to say better than I can. But I think I may say this one thing, that it is common knowledge that a ring was formed some time ago in India for the purpose of "rigging" the market against the Indian Government.
960
There are only four firms who deal largely in silver in London, and three of these had acted and were acting at the time for this ring. That left one firm, our firm, which was the only one not connected with this speculative ring. I would also like to say that when in the instructions to us secrecy was made one of the chief objects, the reason will be evident to the House. When you have a large purchase of silver to make it is desirable that it should be kept secret in order to avoid the probable or the certain rise that would occur in the market if that information leaked out. We were verbally informed that after the reasons for secrecy were over the India Council would probably go back to their old channels for purchasing. We acted absolutely under the daily instructions of the Finance Committee who gave us orders for half a million and a quarter of a million at a time, sometimes telling us to abstain from and sometimes telling us to resume purchase—at one time telling us to abstain quite for a long time because of the uncertainty of the monsoon, under which circumstances, if this proved unfavourable, they might not have required to purchase as much silver or perhaps no more.
Practically no inkling of the purchase crept out until the first shipments of silver had arrived in India and were sent to the Mint. We were complimented by the Indian banks, whose business it was to find such a fact out, on the way in which the secret of the India Council was kept, and we had a letter of thanks from the India Council for the way we had carried out their instructions. Your Lordships can therefore imagine the surprise and disappointment we experienced when we read the attacks upon us in the public Press, chiefly through lack of information. One newspaper—and the statement was copied into a great many others—actually published a statement that the Under-Secretary was a member of my firm. I do not think it is necessary for me to say that he has never had, and has not now, any connection whatsoever with our firm, beyond the fact that he has a few hundred pounds which were deposited with us at interest when he was a boy and which still remains with us. That is the only connection in any way between my brother and the firm, and I wish to contradict any question of his having any further connection with our firm. I can only imagine

961
that some of the attacks on our firm and on the Indian Government have been instigated by the speculators in India who, having carried their silver holdings for several months, losing interest thereon, were balked of the huge profits, not confined to the £99,000 mentioned in the House of Commons, but of a far larger sum which they had expected to make from the India Council.
The third subject with which I must trouble your Lordships is a reference in the public Press to the statement that on tenders to the India Council there was an intimation that firms having a partner in the House of Commons must not tender. This may be so, but I have never seen such a clause, nor till now have I heard of such a clause. We never made any tender to the Indian Government, and no such clause appears in any of the instructions sent to us nor in our sale notes to them. It never occurred to me nor to any of my partners that such a rule would apply any more in this case than with regard to transactions with Canada or any other part of the Empire.
The fourth subject, and the last, to which I would like to refer is the attack that has been made upon us because of the large loans that we have had from the India Council during the past year. We have done business of this kind with the India Council for over twenty-seven years, as other firms have done, and I would like to mention that these sums that have been lent to us have frequently been of large amounts. During last year the largest amount it ever reached was £1,050,000. I have in my hand some figures which I have had looked up, and I find that in May, 1909, before my brother was Under-Secretary, the figures reached £850,000, and in February, 1905, when there was no Liberal Government in power, the amount was exactly the same. The reason that it has increased to £1,050,000 is this. When the India Council are large and anxious lenders in the market their loans are governed by three considerations: first, the willingness of the borrowers to take the money from the India Council; secondly, the trustworthiness of the approved borrowers; and, thirdly, whether those firms approved have sufficient of the particular securities
962
which the India Council requires when it makes loans to approved borrowers. As far as the question of the willingness of borrowers to take these loans is concerned, that depends on the market value of money. At the time of these large loans from the India Council the rate was 2½ per cent. during a short period, as mentioned in the Press, but the rate varies, and at the present moment the rate charged by the India Council is 4¼ per cent., so that the statement that they borrow at 3½ per cent. and lend at 2½, per cent. certainly does not apply at the present moment as they are making a profit. But I do not wish to enter into that question at the moment.
As to the third point, which is the most important—the question of the sufficiency of securities of the particular kind required from the approved borrowers—it is well known that so large were the amounts during this year that were at one time lent out by the India Council that there was a scarcity of these particular securities among the approved borrowers, and for that reason the India Council lent large sums to the clearing banks generally at lower rates than they could have lent to the approved borrowers if the approved borrowers had more of the securities upon which they could borrow from the India Council; and I can only believe that it was because my firm happened to be the holders of a large amount of "short-dated floaters," as these securities are called, that the amount reached this large figure, although it is only £200,000 more than the loans to us under previous Governments.
I have to thank your Lordships for the kind manner in which you have listened to what I have had to say. If there is any further information upon these transactions which, after the noble Marquess has answered the noble Lord who initiated this discussion, the House would like me to give and it is in my power to give it, I am perfectly willing to do so. I have waited under attacks against my personal honour and the honour of my firm until this opportunity has occurred for me to address you, and I am very grateful to the noble Lord that the Question he has put on the Paper has enabled me so to address you.
LORD FABER: My Lords, I was greatly interested in the remarks of the noble Lord who brought tins subject to our notice to-day, and I listened very sympathetically to what fell from the noble Lord who has just sat down. Personally I do not look at this matter of the Gold Reserves from the political point of view. In fact, so far as that goes I think the India Council have been right in the majority of the actions they have taken. I look at the matter from the business point of view, because business circles are greatly interested in the position of the Gold Reserves held in India and here for the India rupees. More interest has been excited lately than would otherwise have been the case by reason of three or four very good articles that have appeared in The Times, evidently written by an expert. When the Indian Government came to the conclusion that a sovereign was to represent 15 rupees they put India practically on a gold basis. In the meanwhile the India Council bought a great amount of silver bullion because of the great demand for rupees and coined the bullion into rupees, which were worth a great deal more than the bullion. The result of that transaction over a series of years is that we have now £20,000,000 in the Gold Reserve of India, which is invested partly in gold, but the greater part in securities. That opens a very interesting question. I am told that the Gold Reserve is to be increased by £5,000,000, which is wise and right. I cannot think it was good finance on the part of the Council when they took part of the reserves which they had accumulated from the coinage and used it for other purposes, such as constructing railways, and so on. The amount of profit made out of the coinage should have been kept wholly and solely for the purpose of redeeming silver in gold if tendered. The balances in London appear to have been too large lately, but I am told there is good reason for that. It is that short-time bonds are maturing in large amount, and the money is held to pay the bonds as they fall due. That is the proper course to pursue.
Now we come to the difficulties. First of all, should the Gold Reserve that we have be kept in India? To that I answer, Yes; and for this reason. The promissory note in the shape of the rupee will be
964
presented in India, and the gold ought to be there to pay it. The next question is whether the £15,000,000 or £18,000,000 which is the greater part of the Gold Reserve, should be kept in gold or in securities. Academically speaking, it should be kept in gold, but that is a very costly proceeding, entailing a loss of interest of £600,000 or £700,000 a year. Is there any danger of so sudden a rush for gold in India in exchange for the rupee that the India Council would not have time to telegraph to England to sell securities and remit gold to India? It is not easy to get £10,000,000 of gold in a short space of time, but with all the reserve we have in London and the well-known credit the Indian Government enjoys I would have thought that there was no fear of a sudden rush for gold. Writers in the Press take the view that all the reserve ought to be kept in gold. My commercial mind does not like the idea of throwing away £600,000 or £700,000 interest if it can be helped, and I do not think the necessity is great enough to justify us in keeping all the reserve in gold. I may be a heretic in this matter. I allow that gold is the bedrock of credit, but I think our experience must count for something, and if we kept the whole of the reserve in gold it would be an expensive luxury indeed. I hope that the noble Marquess will give some indication of what is in his mind, because this is an important business point.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE): My Lords, the subject of Indian currency and finance, I am afraid, cannot be regarded as one of universal, or even general, public interest, and it is, as we all know, one of great complexity; but at the same time I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Inchcape for having raised this question to-day, partly on account of the personal matter upon which my noble friend Lord Swaythling spoke in a manner upon which I am sure the House would wish to congratulate him, both for the way in which he performed his task and also for the substance of what he was able to say.
It is, indeed, true that for a considerable time past a series of attacks have been made in different quarters both upon the India Office as a whole and upon various individuals in and out of that Office.

965
So far as the general system of assault upon the financial methods of the India Office is concerned, that is no new story. There always have been a number of people who have taken distinct exception to our methods and proceedings, and very often from quite different points of view. Some of the criticisms which have been made from Indian sources in India represent, generally speaking, a kind of national Indian amour propre, which resents the fact that so large a part of Indian financial business should be conducted here in London and not in the Peninsula itself. That, like all questions of amour propre, is a sentiment with which it is not always easy to argue. But there has also been a more definite line of attack from those same natives of India and also from a great many Anglo-Indians engaged in business in India, who have regarded with suspicion the kind of deference which they say that we at the India Office show to the opinion of the City of London, thereby sacrificing the commercial interests of those engaged in business in India—they are not for the moment speaking of the Indian taxpayer and revenue-producer, but those engaged in business—in favour of those engaged in business in London.
As the noble Lord who has just sat down reminded us, there has been lately a series of articles in The Times, written, as that newspaper was careful to point out, from a distinct and somewhat biased standpoint, but representing, no doubt, a certain volume of opinion in India. Those articles covered practically the whole ground of Indian finance in all its aspects. I do not propose to touch at any length upon a great many of those points, but to confine myself so far as possible to the two questions raised by my noble friend Lord Inchcape in his Question. But it is important that the House should realise what the character of some of the other attacks made upon us has been, and for that purpose I will read an extract, from an article in an evening newspaper of, I suppose, large circulation and at any rate a great reputation in the past—I mean the Pall Mall Gazette. The Pall Mall Gazette of October 31 said—
"It is quite evident now that the scandals of India Office finance are going to be brought into the light of day. Only an Edmund Burke could do full justice to their magnitude. The venality of the Nabobs of an earlier era, the evils of Tammany Hall, the revelations of Radical rapacity in other directions in recent years, all become insignificant
966
when compared with the vast and impudent perversities which have been organised in Whitehall M the last six or seven years. The ramifications of the affair are very serious. Some names hitherto honoured are about to be called in question. The abuses are of varying forms, and have escaped attention chiefly by reason of their incredible size and their astonishing effrontery. Sometimes institutions and corporations have derived benefit, while the individuals really concerned are in the background; at other times the 'benefits' have been more directly individual. It is only when we get down to the way Indian Loans have been floated in the London Money Market that we begin to realise the practices going on unchecked, while Secretaries of State, present and past, have been persistently fooled and hoodwinked. We repeat that this is going to be a very nasty business."
We are passing generally through a phase of violent and unqualified statement in many places and on many subjects, a phase which has lasted for some time, but which I hope will not last for ever. If, for instance, we were now to read in an article that one controversialist had said of another that his proper fate ought to be that he should be publicly impaled in Trafalgar Square and that his disembowelled carcase should be exposed on a gibbet on the Horse Guards Parade, we should feel entitled to infer that the two gentlemen concerned perhaps did not, as the phrase is, see altogether eye to eye on some question affecting the elementary education of youth, or perhaps the importation of manufactured goods from abroad. But even after making all allowance for the habits of to-day, one would not be surprised if on reading an article such as that which I have just quoted people outside ventured to surmise that something was slightly wrong. Therefore it is desirable that an authoritative statement should be made in relation to these purchases of silver about which my noble friend has asked.
In making that statement I can testify to the complete accuracy of everything which HI from my noble friend Lord Swaythling in relation to the part played by his firm. As is well known, the Government of India is always prepared to give rupees in India—silver coins—in exchange for gold. Rupees in India are an unlimited tender, just as 5 franc pieces are in France and silver dollars are in the United States. Of course that fact does not mean that either France or the United States or India has adopted a bi-metallic system, because that would involve the opening of the mints in these respective countries to the free coinage of silver for anybody who chose to tender that, metal

967
There is, in fact, a single standard of exchange—that is to say, gold—although there is a double standard of value in the country itself in the case of all those three nations. The result has been that since the recommendations of the Fowler Committee were accepted the rupee has remained stable at the value of 1s. 4d.—the fifteenth of a £1. It is important to note that the number of rupees issued does not rest on any act of the Government, but is the act of the public in India. The number of rupees required depends on the amount of gold which the Indian public chooses to tender desiring to receive rupees in exchange. The Government of India holds its rupees in large quantities, partly in the Paper Currency Reserve in India and to a smaller extent in the silver branch of the Gold Standard Reserve.
The usual custom for many years past in India has been that somewhere about the 1st of October, at which time the busy trade season in India begins and rupees are likely to be in great demand, the Government of India should at that time hold in rupees something like sixteen millions sterling, or, in the rupee term, 24 crores of rupees. During the trade season that stock diminishes as rupees are asked for in the course of business, and in the following spring, before the slack season begins, the Government of India has to make up its mind whether in the following October, in order to be in the position of strength signified by the sum which I have mentioned, it will have to engage in smile purchase of silver and coin it into rupees. That is not always an entirely simple matter to decide. A great deal depends upon the character of the monsoon, upon which, as your Lordships know, the prosperity of India and Indian trade so largely depend. If there is a very bad monsoon and trade is consequently slack the demand for rupees may become very much less, and the Government reserve may therefore not be diminished to the extent anticipated. It is therefore by no means an automatic process to purchase silver, particularly in any given quantity, at the beginning of any one year. In the spring of this year it became quite evident, as the stock of rupees was getting low, that purchases would have to be made. As a matter of fact that proved to be the case to a very large extent indeed. As a matter of fact, purchases of silver to the extent of some-
968
thing like six millions sterling were proved to be necessary from the early part of this year.
It is important to note one or two facts in relation to silver. One is that the fluctuations in the price of silver are both marked and sometimes rapid. The change in the price of silver moves sometimes between two figures involving no small difference where large sums are concerned. In the ten years between 1902 and 1911 inclusive, silver was at one time quoted at 211/1⅙d. to the standard ounce, and the highest rate reached during that period was 331/1⅙d. I will show in a moment what the bearing of that fact might be expected to be upon the transactions in which we were engaged. Then, as my noble friend behind me has pointed out, there was no doubt whatever that speculators in India, acting perfectly within their rights, as speculators may and do act, and foreseeing the probability that large purchases of silver would have to be made on behalf of the Government, made up their minds that there was a chance of driving up the price and thereby making a profit, which might be very large indeed.
If your Lordships will forgive my quoting again I would quote from a well-known Indian newspaper, the Pioneer. In its mail edition of December 11 last year it stated—
"The silver position has of late caused a good deal of anxiety to those interested in the welfare of the metal, the turn of the wheel having once more put the key of the situation into the hands of the Bombay group of speculators, whose operations have for long been watched with keen interest, and who have held on to their venture with such pluck and tenacity through good and evil report … The recent movement has shown very clearly to what a large extent the Bombay group of speculators are able to control the market, and how readily they rise to the occasion."
And then on January 29 it said—
"To these men [the speculators] the question of the hour is, What will be the policy of the Indian Government in respect of their currency requirements? Will they have to come on the market very soon and buy largely for coinage purposes, or will they be able to hold off as they have done over the last years? The latest returns show a gradually diminishing stock of rupees. … It is a long time now since the Bombay Syndicate embarked on their venture, and more than once Las shipwreck appeared imminent. … Heavy buying by the Indian Government would certainly assist to this end—
that is, to the success of their venture—
"and it is for that that they have been waiting."

969
Those statements, I think, confirm what Lord Swaythling said of the general opinion as to the existence of an Indian ring determined to push up the price of silver.
Then, as my noble friend stated, the position as regards the purchase of silver is complicated and obviously made more difficult by the fact that there are only four firms in the City of London who act as bullion brokers. Our usual custom in the past has been to employ the Bank of England to arrange these purchases for us. They have employed two particular firms of brokers, firms of high standing and repute, and they intimated that when purchases were made through the Bank of England again they would feel bound to still employ those same firms. That left only two firms if the business was to be done in a manner which would not excite the suspicion of the silver speculators, and oblige us, therefore, to go to much greater expense in making our large purchase; and of those two firms—both I need not say, of high standing—the Finance Committee at the India Office chose my noble friend's firm, the firm of Samuel Montagu and Co., because their dealings were considerably the largest, and it was supposed, I believe rightly, that the particular transactions could in practice be carried out by them and by them only. It is right, in view of the character of the attacks that have been made, to state who the Finance Committee of the India Office are by whose agency these transactions took place. The chairman of my Finance Committee at the India Office is Sir Felix Schuster, very well known in the City and especially as the chairman of the Union of London and Smith's Bank. The other financial member of the Council is a gentleman connected with an equally well-known bank—Mr. Lawrence Currie, of the firm of Glyn, Mills and Currie. The other members of the Finance Committee are Sir Charles Egerton, who is well known as a distinguished officer of long and varied Indian experience; Sir Krishna Gupta, whose Indian experience is also well known, he having been for a long time a valued public servant in India; and Sir Theodore Morison, the character of whose service in India is also well known to your Lordships. And I ought to add that during the whole carrying out of these transactions the advice and concurrence was obtained throughout of a gentleman whose pre-
970
mature loss we all deeply regret both on public and private grounds—I mean my friend Sir Richmond Ritchie, the late Permanent Under-Secretary at the India Office. Those are the men, with myself at their head, about whom language is used in the public Press of a character of which I have given a specimen to the House. Abuse of that kind, of course, does not hurt any of those gentlemen individually, but I suppose a certain amount of mud sometimes sticks when it is thrown, and it is therefore desirable, even at this length, to explain quite fully all the circumstances and the reasons for the action which the Council of India took.
The effect of the employment of Messrs. Samuel Montagu and Co. for this purpose was entirely successful. It is, I think, an undoubted fact that it was not known to those who were interested in increasing the price of silver that the purchases of Messrs. Montagu, carefully made, as I believe, in a great number of different quarters, were made on behalf of the Government of India, and consequently the market movements were not such as to oblige us to pay more than a moderate price for the silver which we bought. I am informed that the commission actually earned by Messrs. Montagu and Co. on the entire transaction amounted to £7,513. That, no doubt, is a considerable sum of money, but it is not a very large sum for us all to agree to sell our souls for in the manner that we have been accused of doing by these critics. Now as regards the saving which was effected to India, I stated just now the figures for the highest and the lowest prices of silver within the last ten years. The difference of a purchase, at the highest of those prices and the lowest, of £6,000,000 worth of silver would have been £3,150,000–52 per cent., that is to say, being the range of prices during that period. Of course, I do not pretend for a moment that by taking the course we did we saved a sum of that magnitude or anything approaching it, but I do say with the utmost confidence that by, employing the firm of Montagu to buy silver in this particular way and thus defeat the operations of the Market a saving of many hundreds of thousands of pounds was made to the revenues of India; and I venture to state, therefore, that the course which we took in employing that firm

971
for this purpose was absolutely justified by the result.
There is, of course, the further point to which my noble friend behind me alluded—the fact that his brother, Mr. E. S. Montagu is Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the India Office, and that fact has been made the groundwork of a charge against Mr. Montagu, against the firm, and against ourselves. I have endeavoured to show, I am afraid at rather excessive length, exactly why the Finance Committee, authorised by the Council to do so, employed Messrs. Montagu for the purpose of this purchase, and the question we have to ask is, Was the purely nominal connection between that firm and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary a bar to a transaction which was of such real moment in saving the money of India? In our view—and it is a view which I still maintain—the circumstances were so special and of such a critical character that we should have been unwise and wrong on the bare fact of the relationship between Mr. Montagu and my noble friend to sacrifice that great advantage to the Government of India. It must be remembered that as a matter of fact Mr. Montagu has no more to do with the finance of India at the India Office than he has to do with the finance of the Panama Canal, and he has no more connection with the firm of Samuel Montagu and Co. than he has with the firm of Marshall and Snelgrove. Thus, the facts being as they are, I cannot think that we should have been right, in obedience to a possible prejudice against the blood relationship of the Under-Secretary and the head of the firm, to have sacrificed this great benefit, although I entirely agree that in such matters appearances are important and cannot be altogether ignored.
Some of your Lordships may remember a debate which took place at the close of the year 1900, raised by my noble friend Lord Rosebery, who is not now in the House, with reference to the appointment of Lord Hardwicke to the same post as that which Mr. Montagu now fills. The late Lord Hardwicke was a valued friend of many of your Lordships, and I have pleasure in thinking that he left behind him at the India Office a tradition not merely of particular popularity but
972
also of efficiency as an Under-Secretary which certainly none of his successors has ever surpassed. As a matter of fact, when he was appointed he was a partner in a firm of stockbrokers in the City—work which he undertook in circumstances which did him all the credit in the world—and he explained, in accepting from Lord Salisbury the position of Under-Secretary for India, that although he could not cease to be a partner in the firm, because he had to think of his future, yet he would not take any active part in its business while holding office and would altogether relinquish an active share in the conduct of the firm. I thought at the time, and still think, that Lord Hardwicke made out a good case. But in connection with this particular charge against our present Under-Secretary it is fair, I think, to remind the House that Lord Hardwicke did remain a partner of a firm of stockbrokers, which at any rate involves, I think, a closer connection with the City of London than the fact of the relationship between my noble friend and Mr. Montagu which has given rise to such embittered attacks upon both. I hope I have disposed of that part of my noble friend's Question relating to the purchase of silver.
As regards the coinage of gold, as Lord Faber reminded us, in 1899 the Fowler Committee recommended that the sovereign should become legal tender at the value of 15 rupees. That was enacted the same year and has been the law ever since. A long time ago—before 1835—there used to be a real double standard in India. The gold mohur was a gold coin of the value of 15 rupees, and although it was not often seen or greatly used in actual currency it was one of the legal Indian coins. But since that time, although I dare say many of your Lordships have seen gold mohurs; they are as a matter of fact gold medals worth their weight in gold but have no established position as coins now that the sovereign and half-sovereign are the gold coins of India. As the noble Lord said, the Fowler Committee also recommended that sovereigns should be coined in India, that there should be a Mint for gold coinage there, and a long correspondence took place between the India Office and the Government of India at that time on the subject of instituting such a Mint. One difficulty,

973
which perpetually exists in connection with this subject, is that if you start a Mint in India for coining sovereigns and half-sovereigns it must be a branch of the Royal Mint, and therefore, so far as it coins those particular coins, under Treasury control, and that has always been regarded as a difficulty, though possibly not an insuperable difficulty, in starting a Mint of that kind in India. Then Lord Faber pointed out that in 1902 the Government of India found that the gold of the Indian mines was being sent, I imagine under some kind of contract, to England, and was therefore not available for the purposes of coinage in India, and that being so they thought it better to drop the question altogether. Lord George Hamilton, who was at that time Secretary of State, agreed that that was the wisest course to take, and from that day until quite lately there have been no communications between the Government of India and the India Office on the subject.
But last year and the year before the question of an Indian Mint was raised in some detail on the Imperial Legislative Council, and the idea was certainly not unsympathetically received by those who spoke on behalf of the Government. So far as the foundation of a Mint for British coinage is concerned, the objections and difficulties which existed to having a branch of the Royal Mint in India of course are still there. But there is another claim for which much, I think, may be said, and I may tell the House frankly that if the Government of India favour the adoption of such a plan, as it is quite possible they may, I personally should give my assent to it, and that is for the institution of a gold coinage in India of Indian coin. The denomination of the coin which I think would probably be the most convenient would be a ten rupee piece—that is to say, a gold coin of the value of 13 s. 4d. It is too early yet to say whether a plan of that kind will be seriously contemplated by the Government of India, and still more whether or not it will be soon set on foot; but so far as I am able to form an opinion I think that the foundation of such a Mint would, at any rate to some extent, satisfy Indian opinion on the subject, and would get rid of such difficulties as exist in connection with a branch of the Royal Mint in that country.
974
It is, of course, impossible to say how far gold coins, whether sovereigns or ten rupee pieces, will be now or will be in the future generally used in India. I think there are signs, however, that the almost instinctive habit of hoarding gold which at one time was so marked in India, is being to a considerable extent broken through. The fear of an investment as distinct from a stocking, which was present to the mind of so many Indians of all grades from the highest to the lowest in the past, is, I should venture to hope, greatly diminishing. For instance, there have been hopeful signs in the direction of investment in such a fact that the great iron works lately started in Bengal by Messrs. Tata Brothers, with a very large capital, hundreds of thousands of pounds, represent, with the exception of an almost ridiculously small fraction, Indian money and Indian money only. That is a satisfactory and hopeful fact, possessing a certain bearing on this question of currency, and therefore I should think that we may venture to look forward with some confidence to an increased use of a gold currency in India among the people, although it may be a long and indefinite time before it becomes the habitual or favourite coin of the country at large.
There are one or two other matters which are not covered by the question of my noble friend and with which, therefore, I will not deal at any length, but as they were raised by the noble Lord opposite and one of them was touched on by my noble friend Lord Swaythling I will speak of them very briefly. One is the question of the loans to approved firms made by the Secretary of State for India in Council from our home balances. Lord Swaythling explained very clearly the circumstances in which those loans are made, and it is not necessary for me to repeat anything that he said. I will only say this, that it is quite possible to exaggerate the favour which is done by the Council of India to such firms as those who take these loans. Bearing in mind the standing of the firms and the security which they have to offer, I appeal to the noble Lord opposite, who as a partner in a very distinguished bank is thoroughly cognisant of these subjects, whether it is not the fact that these particular gentlemen to whom we lend money could, if they wanted it, get it anywhere else.
LORD FABER: Hear, hear.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: That being so, it is rather ridiculous to attempt to pick out the names of particular institutions and firms as being favoured by us in some astonishing manner, as though they were going begging all over the world to raise money and we from our hoards produced money which they could not find elsewhere. Then the noble Lord said a word on the subject of the Gold Standard Reserve, and I was certainly glad, especially in view of the showers of abuse which we have been receiving from so many different quarters, to find that he was good enough to express some general approval of the manner in which we invest a considerable part of that reserve in first-class securities over here. It is true also, as he added, that we are about to keep £5,000,000 in gold in this country. That is an addition to our securities in a form which I have been for some time anxious to bring about, and so far as I am personally concerned I should not at all mind if the amount were somewhat increased. But if it were to be increased to a very large extent the consideration which the noble Lord pointed out with such force conies into mind—that if we lock up an enormous sum of gold in a reserve without absolute necessity for doing it, we are sacrificing the interest of the Indian taxpayer and the revenues of India to an extent which might, and I think would, lay us open to reasonable criticism.
I have heard it suggested by Indian gentlemen of standing that it would be a grand thing if we had an Indian Gold Reserve here in bullion of £100,000,000 sterling, that it would place India in a splendid position, and I have also heard it added that this would add very much to the strength of our own position, of the British position in the world's markets, because it would be known—although I think if these arguments were mentioned in India it might to some extent destroy the attractiveness of the idea—that, after all, this £100,000,000 would be at our disposal if ever we wanted it. I think India would be entitled to say that if Great Britain wants to keep a Gold Reserve of £100,000,000 it is possible for her to do it, but she ought to do it herself, and that to ask India to sacrifice £3,000,000 or £4,000,000 of revenue for that purpose is scarcely a fair demand. The noble Lord expressed the view that the bullion of the Gold Standard Reserve ought, at any rate in fairness, to be kept in India rather than in England. I know that that view is held
976
by some people in India as well as here. I do not think myself it is a point of very great importance, but it is fair in this connection to point out that there is a great deal of gold in India. The Paper Currency Reserve at this moment has got 18,000,000 sovereigns in gold, which, although it is the Paper Currency Reserve, is, of course, available in the last resort for the maintenance of the standard.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: Is that in India?
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Yes; and that being so, although I am prepared to keep an open mind on the point, I do not feel sure that there is anything substantial to be gained from the Indian point of view by not keeping the Gold Standard Reserve here, where in one sense, I think the noble Lord will agree, it is closer to the demand than it would be in India itself. I think, my Lords, those are all the points on which I have to touch. I must apologise for having detained the House at such length, but the personal aspect of the case obliged me to enter into it in a great deal of detail, and I hope that noble Lords opposite will think that I have dealt fairly and satisfactorily with the various charges which have been brought against us in connection with these different matters.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: My Lords, I should be very sorry if the importance of this subject were to be measured by the size of the audience which has assembled to listen to our discussion this afternoon. As a matter of fact, it is scarcely possible to imagine a subject more worthy of detailed scrutiny by either House of Parliament at the present moment than Indian finance, and I hope that our discussion this afternoon, which has ranged over only a small portion of the field, may be the prelude to another debate on another day in a fuller House, when with greater advantage we may be able to deal with the branches of the question not discussed to-day. With the concluding remarks of the Secretary of State I am sure we shall all agree. There is not one of us who does not think that the noble Marquess was entirely justified in taking this opportunity of making a statement, irrespective of our views about the strength of the case that he has put forward. He was not only justified, in my view, in taking, but was bound to take, an early opportunity of

977
giving his views to Parliament, because of the undoubted feeling of uneasiness that has existed for some time both in India and in England as to the present management of Indian finance.
Several expressions of that feeling of uneasiness have been alluded to this afternoon. We have had references made to the articles in The Times, to Questions that have been asked in the Legislative Councils in India, and, I might add, to Questions that are being asked from day to day in the House of Commons. As regards the articles in The Times, the authorship of which is quite unknown to me, although the writer is evidently a man cognisant with his subject, I should like to say that there is a good deal in those articles with which I am not in personal sympathy, and there are several charges made by the writer to which I think a good answer can be made. Still less am I in sympathy with the sort of language which the Secretary of State quoted this afternoon. It was language which by its own violence defeats itself, and which I am sure I may pass by without another word. But I do not think the Secretary of State can complain that this feeling of insecurity and apprehension prevails, to which the Questions in the other House of Parliament are so eloquent a witness. It is almost the inevitable corollary of the system of secrecy, I might almost say mystery—though, perhaps, secrecy is sometimes inevitable—that attends the manipulation—I use the word in no invidious sense—of Indian finance in this country. Therefore I welcome any occasion when the Secretary of State comes forward and gives us an explanation of his policy.
We are really bound to treat our Indian constituents in this matter with the fullest amount of confidence and candour possible. The finances of India which yon administer are not like the revenues which come from the taxpayers of this country who have Members of Parliament to protect them and look after their interests. They come from the taxpayers of a remote part of the Empire who have no official representatives here except the Secretary of State himself, who is not merely the official guardian but almost the only guardian of the interests of the Indian taxpayer in this country. A further consideration which always seems to me to place special responsibility on the Secretary of State in this country is the
978
peculiar system of dual government by which we administer India—partly the Secretary of State in Council here and partly the Government of India in India. In all points of finance it is the English partner, the Secretary of State in Council, who is almost, I think I might say quite, omnipotent. He can over-rule, and does I over-rule, the Government of India on important matters of finance. Indeed, the India Office is not only a financial arbiter, but almost a financial autocrat; and if that be so—and it certainly was my own experience—all the greater is the necessity for treating with absolute sincerity and candour those whose interests are so completely in your hands, who are so helpless in your grasp.
The discussion to-night has related mainly to three questions, and perhaps I may be allowed to say a brief word about each. Firstly, there was the matter of the dealings of the India Office with the firm of Messrs. Samuel Montagu and Co. I am sure there is no one in this House who will not have listened with sympathetic respect to the remarks which fell from Lord Swaythling. He made a spirited defence of the honour and of the action of the firm with which he is connected. May I say, as regards his brother, the Under-Secretary, that no one acquainted with that gentleman could for a moment believe him guilty of any conduct unworthy of the highest standard of British political life. We know, from what we have heard to-night, that he is not even a member of the firm for which his brother has spoken, and I can state from my own experience of the India Office—I was Under-Secretary there myself—that the Under-Secretary has nothing to do, or next to nothing to do, with the Finance Committee. And so I can well believe that Mr. Montagu was quite ignorant of the whole transaction. On the point of prudence, raised by the Secretary of State, I am not certain that I wholly agree with him. The Secretary of State said that while appearances have to be considered, at the same time they were making so good a bargain for the Government of India, they were saving them so many hundreds of thousands of pounds, that they had to risk possible misapprehension of their relations with this firm. I am not certain that His Majesty's Government were altogether justified in taking that risk. We are very sensitive, wisely sensitive, in English public

979
life, about the business connections and the honour of our public men, and I think it might have occurred to the Secretary of State when undertaking these transactions that when at a later date they would be divulged a good deal of not altogether unreasonable suspicion might be aroused by the connection of their Under-Secretary with the firm in question.
Then there comes the question, with which the noble Lord opposite dealt, of the relations of the India Office with his firm in the purchase of silver. I think the noble Lord made his own position clear upon that point, and I doubt not that his firm was chosen because of their peculiar qualifications for this particular undertaking and because they were not members of the ring to which he has referred. But there was another matter which has scarcely been touched upon, and that is the employment of his firm, not merely for the purchase of silver to be coined into rupees in India, but as the recipients of large sums of money lent out at a small rate of interest from the cash balances of the Government of India in the hands of the Secretary of State in London. I cannot enter into that question to-night, because it raises a large question of policy. I am not discussing the question of right or wrong conduct at the moment. But it does raise a big question of policy—whether you are justified in keeping huge cash balances in London, as you have been doing recently, and in lending millions of money at a very low rate of interest—I think only about 2½ per cent.—to large bankers and business men in London. I am not certain that that is sound policy, and I am certain that it excites a great deal of suspicion in India. In Indian newspapers you constantly see the statement that you are taking the money away from a poor country, India, in order to give an advantage to the richest country in the world, England; that you are using Indian money and Indian credit in order to put money into the pockets of big London bankers and dealers, and so on. The charge may be exaggerated; it may even be unfounded; but it is undesirable that it should be made. I think I am right in saying that in the past when I was responsible for the Government of India we never had cash balances in the hands of the Secretary of State at all approaching the present figure. I believe that in the spring of this year you had £18,000,000 of cash balances.
980
That, I know, was an exceptional and inflated sum, which has now fallen to £8,000,000 or £9,000,000. I do not believe that in the time I am speaking of we ever had £9,000,000 of cash balances here. I do not think we ever had more than £4,000,000 or £5,000,000. I do not see why these large balances should be kept here, and I say, in passing, that one of the reasons against the policy seems to me to be the misapprehension to which it may expose you in India.
The next question was the gold coinage. This is a matter on which I may, perhaps, be allowed to say a word, because I happened to be in India when the Fowler Committee reported, and was largely responsible for the steps we took to carry its recommendations into effect. It is quite true, as the Secretary of State has said, that we accepted and did our best to put into practical effect the recommendations of the Fowler Committee, both as regards the institution of a gold standard and of a gold currency. I remember particularly interesting myself in this matter somewhat against the views of Sir Edward Law, my Finance Minister, who was more concerned in building up the Gold Reserve and securing the stability of the currency policy than he was in encouraging the use of gold in India. I argued that it was good policy to familiarise the people with the sight and touch of gold, and I urged that by the use of our currency offices and of the treasuries in the great cities, as well as in the Post Offices and banks we should do everything we could to familiarise the people with gold. We were ready to coin gold. We were quite prepared that the Bombay Mint should be made a branch of the Royal Mint in London. The reasons, which have not been fully stated to-night, for which we were anxious to have a Gold Mint in India—and it is important that this should be known—were these. In the first place, there was the view, perhaps rather a sentimental view, that India ought to coin her own money. Secondly, there were the £2,000,000 of gold coming from the Kolar Goldfields in Mysore. My recollection does not quite agree with that of Lord Inchcape in that respect. It is true that by the time we set to work the firms exporting this gold had made other arrangements, but I do not think there would have been any difficulty in intercepting that gold at Bombay and making arrangements to coin it there. Thirdly, we felt that a Gold Mint at Bombay

981
would do a great deal to popularise the gold currency; and, fourthly, we felt that India ought to have one open Mint. Her Mints for the coinage of silver being closed, we thought she ought to have one Mint for the unrestricted coinage of gold.
Our arrangements broke down because of the obstruction that was offered us here at home, not by the India Office, but by authorities outside the India Office. Every sort of difficulty, technical and legal, was raised, and after struggling for two years I remember throwing up my hands in despair. I gather that some of those difficulties still exist—I mean the difficulty about having a branch of the Royal Mint of England in Bombay; and the Secretary of State, I gather, proposes to deal with the matter by allowing the coinage of small gold coins in India—I think he said a ten rupee piece. That is a matter that I have no doubt he will look carefully into. I remember we discussed very closely whether it would be desirable in India to have a gold Indian coinage of a smaller value than a sovereign. We discussed a ten rupee piece and a five rupee piece, and there was a great deal of difference of opinion on the matter. A great many people said that the Indian peasant and even the Indian merchant was quite satisfied with a currency partly in silver and partly in paper, and that these smaller coins Would not be wanted and that the experiment would be a costly one. There was a good deal of difference of opinion about that. But one thing did rather surprise me in what the Secretary of State said. I gather from him that the present Government of India do not express a strong view in favour of a Mint for gold coinage in India. I was under the impression that when the questions were put in the Legislative Council to which the noble Marquess referred the present Finance Minister in India did express himself strongly in its favour. I may be wrong. If there is a strong feeling in India in favour of the experiment, I think on the whole I would like to see it made, if in no other shape, then in the somewhat attenuated form suggested by the Secretary of State, although I myself should like something larger.
There is one other point, raised by Lord Faber, on which I wish to say a word. It was not included in the subject brought before us by Lord Inchcape, but as the Secretary of State referred to it perhaps
982
I may be allowed to say a word upon it. I speak of the Gold Reserve Fund. In the existence and in the use of that reserve I take great interest, because it is the result of a proposal made by the Government of India at the time when I was at its head. I think, on the whole, my general sentiments are those of Lord Faber. We did deliberately propose at that time that the bulk of this Gold Reserve should be invested, and we did so for two reasons. Firstly, because we wanted to put it in securities in this country which were easily saleable; and secondly, because we wanted to have the advantage of the interest. At that time we did not contemplate that the reserve would touch the enormous figures it has since reached. We thought that if we got a Gold Reserve up to about £10,000,000 it would, in addition to the £10,000,000 or £11,000,000 of the Paper Currency Reserve, give us £20,000,000, which would be sufficient to guarantee the success of our currency policy and give us steadiness of exchange. Matters have gone much further since those days, and I gather from what I read in the newspapers that you now have about £20,000,000 in the Gold Reserve.
There are one or two changes that have been made of which I venture to disapprove. There was the change made on the recommendation of Lord Inchcape's Committee, under which a certain portion of this reserve—I think £1,000,000—was taken for railway expenditure. I do not say that Lord Inchcape's Committee directly recommended that, but they recommended that part of the profits of coinage set aside for this reserve should be used for railway extension, and £1,000,000 was taken. We have had a strong warning to-day against the use of violent language, and therefore I will not use the word "misappropriation," but I suggest that this was not altogether a wise or sound appropriation of that portion of the Gold Reserve. Of this £20,000,000 I understand that nearly £3,000,000, according to a recent answer given in the House of Commons, is held in rupees. That rather puzzles me. I cannot understand why any portion of the Gold Reserve should be held in silver. The rest is held in securities in this country. The Secretary of State told us that he is contemplating some sort of change, that in future he contemplates holding £5,000,000, I think he said, in gold.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Yes, £5,000,000. That is decided upon.
EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: £5,000,000 in gold in this country, and the noble Marquess seemed to be doubtful about the policy of holding any portion of it in gold in India because of the enormous gold accumulation in the Paper Currency Reserve. But the Paper Currency Reserve exists for a different purpose. It exists in order to sustain your rupee notes in that country; and I should like, in addition to the £5,000,000 he proposes to hold in gold in this country, that he should hold a certain amount of the Gold Standard Reserve in gold in India. These are the observations that have been suggested to me by the discussion that has taken place to-night, and I hope that at a later date we may have another occasion when, on a larger field, we may raise other issues of Indian finance at least as important as those we have been examining this evening.
THE EARL OF CROMER: My Lords, I will not detain your Lordships for more than a moment, but as an ex-Financial Member of the Council of India I should like to say a few words. I generally agree with my noble friend Lord Curzon as to the great undesirability of secrecy in all these transactions, but I must confess that in this particular instance I do not see how secrecy was to be avoided. If the Secretary of State had a ring to deal with it was absolutely necessary to break it down, and if it had been known that he was going to employ Messrs. Samuel Montagu and Co. to buy silver the price would have been raised and the operation would have been unsuccessful. It was, no doubt, unfortunate that all sorts of suspicions should be excited, but it was only natural that these suspicions should have been excited. I think that on the whole the action taken by the India Office was perfectly justifiable. As to the question of cash balances, I hope that matter will receive attention. It may interest the noble Marquess to know that when I was appointed a Financial Member
984
of Council in 1880 I remember having a long conversation with Mr. Gladstone on Indian affairs, and the point he chiefly directed my attention to was the question of Indian cash balances. He urged me to reduce them, and spoke of the unwisdom of having unnecessarily large cash balances. When I went out to India I found that Mr. Gladstone had not been well informed as to the Indian cash balances. But it has struck me that the cash balances here are rather excessive, and therefore I trust that the matter will receive the consideration which it certainly deserves at the hands of the Secretary of State.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Perhaps I may state, by way of explanation with reference to the matter mentioned by the noble Earl who has just sat down, that it seemed to me wiser, in view of the scope and complexity of the whole question of Indian currency, not to attempt to cover the whole field in what I said to-day; but if, as was indicated by the noble Earl opposite, it is desired to have some further discussion, particularly in relation to the question of cash balances, I shall, of course, be happy to deal with the matter as best I can, and with any other points connected with Indian finance or currency on which noble Lords may desire information.

CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Wednesday the 27 th instant. (No. 169.)

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I beg to move that the House do adjourn, except for Judicial business, until Monday, the 25th instant.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.