said, that he desired to offer some remarks on an incident which had occurred since the Bill passed through Committee. He thought that it was a question whether, under the circumstances of the case, Her Majesty's Government were entitled to to get any money whatever from the House. But without going as far as that, he asked leave to offer a respectful protest against the conduct of certain of Her Majesty's Ministers who were responsible for the government of Ireland. It would be within the recollection of the House that a Bill dealing with the Irish municipal franchise passed through all its stages in the House of Commons, and was read a third time by a majority of 62—a far larger majority than the normal majority of the late Government. The Secretary of the Local Government Board (Mr. T. W. Russell) supported the Third Reading of the measure. The Bill was sent to the House of Lords a month ago, when there was ample time for its consideration, but the Second Reading was postponed to suit the personal convenience of Lord Londonderry.

On a point of Order, Sir, I should like to know whether the hon. Gentleman is in Order in discussing the action of the Members of the House of Lords on the Third Reading of the Appropriation Bill.

The hon. Member is clearly not in Order in discussing the action of the House of Lords; and I intended to intervene when, it was quite clear that he proposed to take such a course.

said, that, of course, he bowed to the ruling of the Chair. He did not propose to refer to any action of any Member of the House of Lords who was not also a Member of the Government, and for whose salary, or that of his advisers, provision was made in this Bill. He apprehended that if he followed that course he should be in Order.

The hon. Gentleman will not be in Order in discussing the action of the House of Lords under the guise of discussing the action of certain Members of the Government in the House of Lords.

said, that without pursuing the matter in detail, he might say this, that an offer of compromise was made in respect of this Bill which would meet several points which had been raised.

I am very unwilling to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but it is quite evident that if we are to discuss the terms of an alleged compromise there must be a reply involving a Debate upon the merits of the Bill and the conduct of the other House in this matter. This would appear to me to be out of Order. May I ask whether it is not a fact that the only official of the Irish Government connected with this matter, directly or indirectly, is Lord Cadogan, whose salary is not provided for in this Bill?

said, that he could quite understand the right hon. Gentleman's desire, in view of the General Election, to prevent a discussion upon this matter.

Order, order! The hon. Member is only entitled to discuss the point of Order raised.

said, that the salary of the Chief Secretary, who was responsible to that House for his official acts, was part of this Bill.

I think that the hon. Member is clearly discussing the action of the House of Lords, and he cannot properly do that, directly or indirectly, upon this Bill.

remarked that the present Government had associated themselves with a policy which in some cases kept the majority of Catholics in the north of Ireland as people proscribed. In Derry there were 16,000 or 18,000 Catholics and only 14,000 Protestants, yet—

, interposing again, said: The hon. Member is discussing the details of a Bill which is not before the House. He must confine himself to discussing the action of the Government upon the Appropriation Bill.

asked whether he would be in Order in asking Her Majesty's Government to give a pledge to bring in a Bill in the next Parliament to remove the grievances to which he had referred. In the City of Derry, as he had said—[Ministerial cries of "Order!"]—there were 18,000 Catholics and 14,000 Protestants according to the last census, yet in that city the Franchise was so narrow—

This is a subject which would be proper to raise in a discussion on the Municipal Franchise Bill, but is not proper upon the present Bill.

said, that in the meantime he raised his respectful protest against the policy of bigotry and treachery of the present Government, which had not been equalled by any other Government of recent times.

said, that Her Majesty's Government held now the opinions which they had always held—that there were anomalies and injustice in the present Municipal Franchise. He could not, however, be expected upon the present occasion to make an announcement as to the legislative policy of the Government.

said, that he desired to take advantage of what would be the last occasion for any Member in the present Parliament, and, he was afraid, the last occasion he would himself ever have, to call the attention of the Education Office to the system of teaching arithmetic in schools under the Education Code. The Act stated very properly that the subjects to be taught were to be such as would be useful. The Imperial system of weights and measures had prevailed wherever the English language prevailed, but it had often been erroneously stated that there was no relation whatever between measure and weight in that system. He wished that the Education Office would require that the fixed and settled relation between measure and weight should be taught in the schools under their control. In his own experience in the management of a large school in the North of England he had introduced a gallon measure, which, when filled with water weighed 10 1bs., and in this way he taught the scholars that 1 1b. was a tenth part of a gallon. There was, in former years when the gallon was eight pounds of water, an old saying, that

"A pint is a pound

All the world round."

The hon. Member rose to discuss the conduct of the Education Department, but he must not travel outside that.

proceeded to say that a cubic foot of water weighed 1,000 ozs., and this gave great facility for calculating the weight of solid and liquid substances from their dimensions and specific gravity. That and similar matters were not taught in the schools, and he complained of this neglect on the part of the Department. They were useful and practical subjects, which he contended, ought to be taught.

I think the hon. Member is hardly criticising the conduct of the Education Department; he is rather suggesting legislation.

No; it is matter of Departmental administration as to what ought to be taught in schools under the Department. Proceeding to refer to the requirement of the Code that the children should be taught the advantages of the decimal or metrical system, the hon. Member said that he objected to the Code being made the propaganda of a foreign system of weights and measures, which had not received the sanction of the law of this land, while the scientific basis and advantages of the Imperial system were not systematically taught. He had called attention two days ago to the useful relation of the weights of the bronze coins to the division of the ounce, and to the half-penny being exactly one inch in diameter. These facts were not taught in the schools. He complained, in conclusion, that the Education Department taught that which was unnecessary, and did not teach that which was necessary and useful.

said, that he thought that the Government were getting this Bill under conditions almost unknown in the history of Parliament. The First and Second Readings and the Committee stage had passed without a word, and the present Debate upon the Third Reading would occupy but a very short time. He did not intend himself to occupy much time, because the present Government were not responsible for the money which the House was now about to appropriate. He regretted that they were appropriating such large sums year after year, and Parliament after Parliament. The effective and ineffective branches were both getting more and more money, and, whether a Liberal Government or a Conservative Government were in power, there was a gradual increase in the Estimates. The Army and Navy Estimates were swollen year after year, and he believed that the growth of expenditure was greater than the increase of wealth. The motto of the old Liberal Party used to be "Peace, Retrenchment, and Reform," but the present Liberal Party were not so strongly in favour of the first of those principles. The Liberal Party of to-day seemed to be competing with the Conservative Party in seeing who should put forward the highest Estimates, and who should be considered the most important and active Imperialists. He thought that in this race his hon. Friend the Member for Dundee (Mr. Edmund Robertson) had out-jingoed even the chief of the jingoes—the great Silomo himself. On the Navy Estimates at present more money was being voted than ever before, and we were now in this position, that we had got the ships but we had not got the men to man them. This increase of expenditure was largely due to the insane competition among the Powers to have the largest number of ships. We could not compete with the continental powers in the size of their armies—which were becoming an intolerable burden to them, and did much to cause the spread of socialism and anarchy abroad, but we could, and did, compete with them in having the largest number of ships. Italy began the movement, other nations felt obliged to follow, and no one could tell when it would end. But we were at a disadvantage in regard to manning our ships because we could not, like the other powers, have recourse to conscription. We had got the money and we had got the ships, but we had not got the men to man them, and if we went on much longer at the present rate we should have to restore the old press gang or resort to conscription in order to obtain the necessary force. Moreover, notwithstanding the great expenditure, we had no adequate and efficient Naval Reserve, and did not go the right way to provide one, for the existing conditions of the entry of mercantile officers into the Reserve excluded very many of the best class of men. In the name of the old principles of the Liberal Party, therefore, he protested against the amount and the system of Naval expenditure. Similar complaints of reckless expenditure might be made in regard to the Army Estimates. We spent more on our Army than some continental Powers did on armies ten times larger. He wished he could say the Army was as efficient as it was costly, but he could not. He was glad, however, that there was some prospect of a new state of things being shortly inaugurated. For very many years past the Army had had a Commander-in-Chief who was said to be wedded to old habits and regulations. In a short time that gentleman would retire, and the event would, no doubt, lead more or less to great reconstructive changes, and he hoped the next time the Army Votes were submitted to the House the Government would be able to show that the country was getting something more than at present for the amount of money expended. The Estimates for the Civil Services were growing also, but he had not so strong an objection in this case as in the others, because a large amount of this money was spent for the education and the social comfort of the people. Still, there was a good deal of money unwisely spent even under these Estimates, especially in projects in Africa, which could be of no benefit to this country, but might lead to much mischief, and possibly to war and bloodshed. Then in regard to the Estimates themselves, the present system of submitting them to Parliament was most unsatisfactory. The habit had grown up with Governments of both Parties of postponing Supply until the end of the Session, and then rushing it through at late hours of the night when the House was small and every Member present was tired. It was impossible to examine and criticise the Votes adequately or properly under such circumstances. In the present Session they had so far passed only a few of the Estimates. He hoped that in the next Parliament one of the first things done, whatever Party was in power, would be to alter, or remodel, their procedure in this respect, so that Supply might be brought on in such a way and at such times as would give hon. Members full opportunity of examining and criticising the Estimates. One day a week should be set apart for their consideration. He had no wish to hinder the passing of the Bill or to unnecessarily detain the House, but before sitting down he wished to ask the Leader of the House whether he still thought he would be able to carry out the programme laid down a day or two ago—that Parliament would be prorogued early that afternoon, dissolved on Monday, and the Writs sent out in time to be received in Scotland before midnight on Monday?

said, he desired to join in the protest of the right hon. Member for Midlothian, who was for so long a time his honoured Leader, against what the right hon. Gentleman called the insane policy which had characterised all Governments during the last few years. The right hon. Gentleman had declared that it was sufficient to cause their grandfathers to rise in their graves and howl against the expenditure on military and naval armaments that had taken place on the part of those calling themselves Liberals. The Liberal Party, so far as he understood it, was in favour of expenditure sufficient for defence, but they had gone far beyond this, and had commenced a wild competition with the great military powers of the Continent to see who could spend most upon military and naval armaments. They were told that this policy was the result of a policy of continuity in Foreign Affairs. He was himself in favour of a policy of continuity in Foreign Affairs, but he wanted that policy to be a continuity of his own policy. But they were simply told by Liberal Ministers when they came into power that their business was to continue the policy of their predecessors, who might have been Conservatives, Tories, or Unionists—he hardly knew what Gentlemen called themselves now—but, he supposed, it was the old policy of the Tory Party. Against that he registered his protest. They were sometimes told also that the House Commons ought not to interfere in any way with the Minister for Foreign Affairs; but he altogether disputed that contention. He held that the House of Commons ought to interfere with, and ought to control, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and for his part he regretted very much that, at the present time, neither the Prime Minister, who was responsible in the first place, nor the Minister for Foreign Affairs was in that House. It might be said by hon. Gentlemen opposite that the Liberal Party had done the same thing. He knew that they had done so, and he deeply regretted it, for he thought that one of the reasons why the Liberal Party had not be been able to augment their majority at the by-elections was that the Premier and the Secretary of State for foreign Affairs were not in that House, where they would be obliged to defend their policy and to answer any protests made against it. He was not going to weary the House by a long speech. He did not intend to speak at all that morning, but the sound observations made by his hon. Friend had induced him to rise and to protest, once for all, against the system of competition on the part of the two Front Benches in a scheme of reckless expenditure. He did not know whether he should be able again to protest against this expenditure if it was continued by Her Majesty's present advisers, because he did not know whether he should be a Member of the House in the next Parliament, but whether that was so or not, he hoped there would be Members of the House who would be actuated by sound Radical principles, and who would do their utmost—no matter what Government was in power—to bring the Party back to their old rallying cry of "Peace, Retrenchment, and Reform."

said, that this was the only Government business on the Paper. The House, however, would not formally adjourn now, but the Sitting would be suspended. Sitting suspended at fifteen minutes after Eleven a.m. House resumed at Two p.m.