Small Admiralty Craft
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what second and third-class cruisers, naming them, have been built to replace the number of small craft removed from the Navy List in the early part of 1905; and how many, and which, of these are in commission or are ready for immediate service.
No necessity has yet arisen for building the type of vessel named, but the "Boadicea," now under construction at Pembroke, is the first of a new class. Since the date named in the Question, eight scouts and three third-class cruisers have been completed.
Refrigerating Machinery For Ships' Magazines
I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that, in consequence of recent experience of the decomposition and deterioration of smokeless powders in hot magazines, the Admiralty have found it to be urgently necessary to ask for tenders for refrigerating machinery for the magazines of our ships, involving large additional expenditure on Vote 8; whether he is aware that Vote 8, as presented, does not include any expenditure on refrigerating machinery; and whether the Government will follow the accepted practice in this case, where i the Vote has been presented but not discussed in Committee of Supply, by presenting a Supplementary Estimate.
It is true that Vote 8 for the current year does not include any specific provision for refrigerating machinery, but I am not prepared at this date to affirm either that there will not be sufficient funds in the several sections of that Vote to meet the charge for such machinery falling in the current year, or that a supplementary grant for naval services will be needed. I hope, however, in accordance with the accepted practice, to make a statement on the general subject when Vote 8 is moved in Committee of Supply.
Will not a sum approaching something like £500,000 be required for this purpose, and will this large sum have to be taken from other necessary services?
No.
But Vote 8 as originally drawn did not provide for that. Is it intended to have a Supplementary Estimate or not?
I cannot yet say if one will be necessary
Is it not customary in cases involving such large sums for us to pay our way as we go along?
I am, with the. consent of the Treasury, following the accepted practice in this case.
Will any considerable portion of this machinery have to be supplied during the current financial year?
Yes, and a certain sum will be required this year in consequence.
Is it intended that all vessels shall have this refrigerating apparatus?
I have answered that on more than one occasion.
Is it not urgent to provide it at once?
I do not think so.
Torpedo Destroyer Armaments
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, for the purpose of increasing their fighting efficiency against torpedo craft, the river class of destroyers are each being armed with three 8-cwt. 12-pounder guns instead of five 6-pounder guns; whether these guns, instead of being ordered from Woolwich or elsewhere, are being taken without replacement from a large number of ships; and, as these guns were used for boat work or landing parties, and were also mounted on distinct permanent mountings as part of the armament of the ships, will he state if it is the intention of the Admiralty to replace them.
In the opinion of the Admiralty it is not desirable in the interest of the naval service to give information on matters connected with re-armaments.
Is my right hon. friend aware that this information has already appeared in the newspapers, and that these guns have been removed from the ships and put on the destroyers? And he is further aware that he stated, in answer to a Question, that no guns had been removed?
I have nothing to add to the statement I have already made.
The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the Question. It is of very considerable public interest and one in which Members on both sides of the House are interested.
Channel Fleet
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how many unarmoured cruisers are at present attached to the Channel Fleet.
Three, as stated at page 269 of the Navy List.
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how many torpedo-boat destroyers are at present attached to the Channel Fleet.
None. They are sent as occasion requires —six and a scout last week, thirty-six and three scouts next week.
Royal Yacht Contract
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how many firms of shipbuilders were asked to compete, or did compete, for the contract for the new royal yacht; whether these tenders included the upholstery and decorative work of the yacht; who was the successful tenderer, and at what price including everything; was the contract carried out by the Admiralty exactly as accepted; and, if not, will he say what alteration was made with the upholstery and decorative sub-contract, and why.
I am informed that nine firms were invited to compete, and eight submitted designs and prices. The tenders did include upholstery and decorative work. I understand that Messrs. A. & J. Inglis' tender was accepted at a price of £120,000 to include everything, subject to such modifications as might be found necessary. These modifications were afterwards found to be so important that eventually Messrs. Inglis submitted a new design to meet the altered requirements. At the same time they were relieved from the duty of providing furniture and decoration for the royal apartments, and a contract for this part of the work was placed with Messrs. Waring. Inglis' price was ultimately fixed at £123,500, and the sum to be paid to Waring's at £6,500.
Do I understand that by this alteration the price of the yacht was increased by £3,000 on the first estimate?,
The price was increased a great deal more than that.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the designer to Messrs. Maple also designed for Messrs. Inglis, whose contract was rejected?
That was before my time altogether.
Greenwich Observatory
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can state the result of the negotiations between the Admiralty and the London County Council with reference to the generating station at Greenwich.
No statement can be made yet as to the result of the negotiations, which are still proceeding.
Will the right hon. Gentleman press the matter forward? It has been going on a long time.
I will do my best.
The Unrest In India—Cases Of Lala Lajpat Rai And Ajit Singh
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, by the State Prisoners Regulation, 1818, under which Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh have been deported, it is provided that when it may be determined that any person shall be placed under restraint otherwise than in pursuance of some judicial proceeding the grounds of such determination shall from time to time come under revision, and the person affected thereby shall at all times be allowed freely to bring to the notice of the Governor General in Council all circumstances relating to the supposed ground of such determination, or to the manner in which it may be executed; and whether either of the above-named State prisoner have availed themselves of the permission so accorded by the Regulation.
The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative; the Answer to the second part, according to the latest information in my possession, is in the negative.
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether at the time of their arrest and deportation, or at any other time, Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh made any protests against the treatment to which they were subjected or raised any defence to the charges alleged against them; and, if so, what was the nature of the protests or defence.
According to my information, the Answer is in the negative
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether at the time of the arrest and deportation of Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh, they were informed of the grounds upon which it was thought necessary to arrest and deport them; and, if so, what were those grounds.
The persons mentioned knew that they were arrested under the State Prisoners Regulation, and one of them has since applied for a copy of the order authorising his arrest. He had a copy given him and he was informed in the terms of the Regulation that the reason for his arrest and deportation was to preserve a portion of His Majesty's dominions from internal commotion.
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will say whether Lala Lajpat Rai and others, recently arrested summarily in India, are considered as political prisoners; and what treatment is accorded and where they are detained.
The two persons referred to are officially designated State prisoners. They are detained at Mandalay, where they are lodged, in houses within the fort. They receive allowances for maintenance suited to their positions in life.
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there is any difference between the treatment of these prisoners and political prisoners in this country; whether they have any means of communicating at all with their friends outside, or whether, under any conditions, their friends have access to them?
I believe my hon. friend and I have fought together the battle of political prisoners before now. If he will put a Question down, I do not doubt that the Answer will be satisfactory.
May I ask whether the charge of causing internal commotion is not one to be dealt with by the Penal Code, passed forty years after this Ordinance, and whether, under these circumstances, there is any jurisdiction under the Ordinance of 1818 to deal with these offencos?
My hon. and learned friend being a lawyer, must see that a Question of that kind must have notice.
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the fact that Lala Lajpat Rai was not connected with the agitation carried on by Ajit Singh, and that no specific charge of preaching sedition has been alleged against him, in what particular did the Regulation of 1818 apply, giving power to the Indian Government to order the arrest and deportation of Lajpat Rai.
It has never been admitted, and is not the case, that there is no connection between Lajpat Rai and the agitation carried on by Ajit Singh. The Regulation of 1818 gives full power to the Government to take action under it whenever reasons of State, including the security of the British dominions from internal commotion, require any person to be placed under personal restraint.
Am I to understand, then, that there has been a definite charge against Lajpat Rai of causing sedition?
I have already said, almost too often, in answer to my hon. friend and to one or two hon. Gentlemen below the gangway on this side, that it is entirely adverse to the public interest to go into details as to the circumstances which the Government of India, with my full assent, thought justified the application of this law—the law of the land.
May I ask, if it can be proved beyond a shadow of doubt that Lajpat Rai did not preach sedition, is there to be no appeal or redress then?
May I ask whether, if it is so dangerous for Lajpat Rai to go back to the Punjab because it is in such an inflammable condition, the right hon. Gentleman would make an inquiry into the condition of the people and ascertain the causes of disaffection?
Does not my hon. friend feel assured that I am all day long inquiring into it?
May I ask whether it is a fact that Lajpat Rai was only present at one of the many public meetings which were organised and addressed by Ajit Singh?
To the best of my information, that is not the case.
At how many then?
Did the right hon. Gentleman hear the observation made by the Member for Sheffield, "Why not shoot Lajpat Rai?" That is a shameful observation. Withdraw what you said, Sir.
I rise to a point of order. I beg respectfully to ask you, Sir, whether it is in order for an hon. Gentleman in this House to make the suggestion publicly that one of these British subjects should be shot.
Perhaps it is unnecessary to say I made no observation of any sort. I spoke to myself.
I heard you myself.
We all heard it here.
With all respect, an hon. Gentleman who speaks aloud in this House speaks to the whole Empire. I wish to ask is it consistent with order and practice in this House that a clear incitement to murder should be made?
*
I certainly did not hear the expression.
We all heard it here.
*
I said the expression did not reach my ears.
They listen to private conversations. [NATIONALIST shouts of "Oh, oh!")
Withdraw. How dare you say that!
*
The observation did not reach my ears. That is all I am prepared to say as to that. I should like to add this, that if the hon. and gallant Member for Sheffield could control the observations which he if always interjecting, not only during Question time, but during debate, it would be to the general advantage of the House.
May I with great respect ask the Secretary for India whether, in view of the very serious condition of affairs in India, and the damage and exasperation likely to be caused by the reporting of an observation made in this House that an Indian prisoner should be shot, he would at once take measures to dissociate not only himself, but the Government, entirely from the statement?
I think all I need to say is that it is very fortunate that the hon. Gentleman is not, and never has been, in any position of executive responsibility.
I beg to give notice that, if anything should happen to any of these Indian prisoners imprisoned without trial, a very considerable section of Members in this House—certainly Members representing Ireland — will take steps to put the blame on the shoulders of those who are responsible.
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he was consulted by cable by the Government of India before the order for the arrest and deportation of Lajpat Rai was actually issued; and whether he has since made any inquiries as to whether there were charges sufficiently grave alleged against Lajpat Rai to warrant the case coming under the Regulations of 1818.
The case being deemed a. case of urgency, the Governor-General in Council decided at once to issue the two warrants, and immediately telegraphed the circumstances and their decision to me. Without hesitation I approved. The Answer to the second; part of the Question is in the affirmative.
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will make further inquiries as to the degree of complicity, if any, between Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh?
No. I do not think I can promise that, because I have had the advantage of long conversations with Sir Denzil Ibbetson, Lieutenant-Governor of the Punjab, and I do not think it is necessary for me to make further inquiries of the kind my hon. friend demands.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is universally affirmed in India that there is no connection whatever —
*
Will the hon. Member kindly put any further Question that he has on the Paper?
The Nawab Of Dacca
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Government of India has granted a loan of 3¼ lakhs of rupees to the Nawab of Dacca; whether a larger loan is to be granted; whether he can state the purposes for which the loan was granted; and what are the terms as to repayment and interest charged.
The Government of India have authorised an advance of £21,000 to the Nawab of Dacca, in accordance with the practice of lending money to land-holders and other notabilities which is well recognised and not at all infrequent in India. I understand that a proposal for a further loan will shortly be referred for my sanction. The purpose of the loan was to maintain the stability of an important family by preventing the Nawab's share of the estate from passing into the hands of outsiders. I am unable to state the terms on which it was granted.
Was this loan made in order to secure the adhesion of the Nawab to the partition of Bengal?
I am informed it had nothing whatever to do with it.
Calcutta High Court Sentences
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the character of the sentences passed by Mr. Justice Stephen, of the Calcutta High Court, upon prisoners for petty crimes, in one case a man of seventy-five years of age being sentenced to ten years imprisonment for attempting to steal an oil canister from a courtyard, another case of four years for stealing a pair of boots exposed for sale in the street, and another case of six years' imprisonment on a young man for theft from his employer; whether he is aware that these sentences are causing apprehension and dissatisfaction in Calcutta; and, if so, will he bring the matter to the attention of the Government of India with a view to inquiry and revision of such sentences.
My attention has not been called to the cases referred to in the Question, but I will make inquiry.
Chenab Canal
*
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the capital sum devoted to the creation of the Chenab Canal was found out of the revenues of the Government of India, which are chiefly collected from small farmers; whether it is incumbent on that Government in the interest of the general taxpayer to recover from those who immediately profit by the construction of such works of irrigation such increased payments as are proportionate to the advantages conferred: and whether the increase in the prosperity of the cultivators affected is greater than the increase in the payments required of them by the Government.
It is the case that the general revenues of India are financially responsible for the capital outlay on the Chenab Canal, and for that of other undertakings of a similar character. The rates charged to cultivators taking the water are fixed on the principle that they should bear some relation to the economic value of the commodity supplied, while leaving a substantial margin of profit to those who use the water. As regards the last part of the Question I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given to Question No. 25, dated 11th June, 1907, as to the selling value of land in the Chenab Colony. †
Trade Descriptions For Imports
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any of the self-governing Colonies have similar regulations to those now adopted by Canada as regards the proper description of imported goods; and, if so, will he make the necessary representations to secure that Ireland may be enabled to learn the extent of her annual trade with those Colonies.
I believe that all Colonies with a Customs tariff provide for the proper description of imported goods; but the regulation referred to relates primarily to the nature and value of the goods, and not necessarily to the country of origin.
Canadian Customs Memorandum
I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the Canadian Customs Memorandum, dated 1st May, 1907, and in particular to the second clause, to the effect that every invoice shall contain a sufficient and correct description of the goods imported; whether, in view of the facilities thereby given lo distinguish goods of Irish origin, he will represent to the Canadian Government the advisability of maintaining this distinction in the preparation of their annual statistical Returns, and thereby enable Ireland to estimate exactly the extent of her trade with Canada.
I am advised that the regulation to which the hon. Member refers looks rather to the proper trade description and valuation of goods than to the country of origin, but I see no objection to asking the Dominion Government if they will give such instructions as may enable the separation of the exports of Irish produce from those of the produce of Great Britain.
Congo Annexation Bill
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs whether he has any information us to the provisions of the Congo Annexation Bill; and, if so, whether he win state how far this Bill will make possible the reforms advocated and urged by the Governments of Great Britain and the United States.† (4) Debates, Clxxv., 1221
The terms of the proposed Congo Annexation Bill have not yet been published, and I cannot say what they will be.
British West Indians And The Galapagos Islands
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any official information showing that a number of British West Indians have been hold in a state of shivery at the Galapagos Islands, and have been chained and beaten and otherwise maltreated; if so, what steps he intends to take to prevent the recurrence of such incidents; and whether he will demand prompt and adequate compensation for the victims and punishment to the persons implicated.
I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer returned to the hon. Member for Mid Armagh on the same subject yesterday as to the facts† The question of what steps should be taken to repatriate the men referred to is now under consideration.
May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will make stringent inquiries as to whether these natives have been encouraged to gamble and borrow money with a view to keeping them in a state of servitude?
The point is this. They owe money to the company, and because they owe money they have been prevented so far from leaving the islands. I do not consider that they ought to be prevented from leaving the islands, and what is now under consideration is what steps should be taken to secure their repatriation.
Hague Conference
On behalf of the hon. Member for the Tewkesbury
Division of Gloucestershire, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been called to announcements made by various foreign Ministers as to the attitude of their Governments on matters to be raised at the Hague Conference; and whether some similar statement can now be made with propriety in respect of the policy to be pursued by this country.† See Page 155.
The only announcements by foreign Ministers which I have seen have been of a very general character, and similar in scope to expressions of opinion which had been previously made on behalf of His Majesty's Government. I think as much publicity has already been given to our views as to those of any other country. The Conference has already met, the various delegates are in communication with each other, and what further statements are made must depend upon their deliberations.
British Consular Staff On The Upper Congo
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the British consular staff in the Upper Congo are at present compelled to utilise the steamers of the missionary societies in order to travel on the waterways, His Majesty's Government will consider the advisability of providing the British consular staff with the requisite means of conveyance, independent of outside assistance.
His Majesty's Consul at Boma has just been provided with a steamer, and the question of supplying His Majesty's Vice-Consuls at Leopoldville and Stanley ville with similar means of conveyance is under consideration.
Housing Of The Poorer Classes At Cairo
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, seeing that in Cairo the poor quarters of Boulak, Abnssieh, Demerdash, Ghamra, and Old Cairo have in large part been demolished to make way for middle-class and upper-class dwellings, and that no provision has been made for the poorer classes ejected by the demolition, he will advise the Eygptian Government to prepare a scheme for the better housing of the working classes of that city.
His Majesty's Government have no reason to suppose that the Eygptian Government are neglecting this question, but the matter is not one on which any advice can usefully be tendered. It is very desirable that the subject should receive attention in Egypt as elsewhere, but progress must be gradual.
Egyptian Judges Of Appeal
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Procureur Général, Mr. E. K. Corbet, C.M.G., Messrs. J. L. Willmore and V. S. Alston, Judges of the Native Court of Appeal in Egypt, were originally appointed by the Egyptian Government without having had any previous legal training whatsoever; and whether he will advise the Egyptian Government to consider the advisability of placing them on the retired list.
I do not know what the legal training was in all these cases. I have no doubt that the qualifications wore considered when the appointments wore made, and I am not aware of any reason whatever for interfering with them.
Is the right hon. Baronet not aware that those gentlemen know nothing whatever of law; that it is a Punch and Judy tribunal?
My information, especially with regard to one case, is directly to the contrary.
And who is that?
Mr. Will-more. With regard to all, I have no reason to suppose that they are in any way not qualified for their duties.
Having regard to my responsibility for putting the Question, will the right hon. Gentleman take the trouble to inquire further?
I have no reason to think there is any need for inquiry.
Egyptian School Regulations
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will advise the British agent at Cairo to consider the expediency of cancelling Article 89 of the Official Code of Regulations, relating to school organisation and discipline, which enacts that pupils are strictly forbidden, under penalty of expulsion from the schools, to supply any information to newspapers, to write any letters or articles to newspapers, or to become agents for any paper.
I have not seen the article in question, but the Code of Regulations must be decided by the Egyptian Educational Authorities.
Foreigners And Income Tax Exemption
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will cause to be laid upon the Table of the House the two Treasury letters of 1842 granting exemption from income tax to foreigners residing abroad on the dividends of Colonial and foreign loans cashed in England on their behalf.
Presumably the hon. Member refers to the Treasury letters of 7th October, 1842, and 5th August, 1856, the material portions of which Were laid upon the Table by me, at the hon. Member's request, on 10th December last.
Income Tax On Foreign Securities Interest
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the interest of Foreign Government securities which is not payable in the United Kingdom, but has to be sent abroad for payment, such as French Rentes, Italian Rentes, and Japanese Internal Loan, are assessable under Schedule C, as are the dividends of Colonial and Foreign Governments which are payable in the United Kingdom, such as Japanese Sterling Loans.
Interest on all Foreign and Colonial securities is chargeable if and when received in the United Kingdom, whether the interest be paid in this country or be collected through an agent. In the former case, it is chargeable under Schedule C; in the latter, under Schedule D.
Income Tax Refund
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what legal documentary evidence is required by the Inland Revenue for a refund of income-tax to prove the ownership of securities standing in name or names other than that of the claimant; or whether an affidavit from the person or persons in whose name or names the investment stands would not be accepted as sufficient evidence when there is no deed of trust.
On the Question of the documentary evidence required, I can add nothing to the Answers which I gave to the hon. Member on 22nd March, 1906.t I am not prepared to say that a simple affidavit from the person or persons in whose name or names the investment stands, unsupported by any independent documentary evidence, would be sufficient evidence when there is no deed of trust. The circumstances of each cash have to be considered on their merits.
Suez Canal Shares
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has considered the desirability of offering to the Governments of the Commonwealth of Australia, of Now Zealand, of India, of Ceylon, of the Straits Settlements, of Hong Kong, of Natal, and of Mauritius, at the current market rate, a proportion of the shares in the Suez Canal Company acquired for the United Kingdom by the late Earl of Beaconsfield, in consideration of the interest in that waterway of those Governments.
No, Sir. I do not think it would be practicable to act upon the suggestion.
Can the right hon. Gentleman say how much those shares have increased in value since they were purchased by Lord Beacons-field?
No, Sir.
† (4) Debates, cliv., 620.
London's Local Taxation Grants
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the Royal Commission on Local Taxation, in their final Report published in 1901, recommended a now scheme of grants from the Local Taxation Account which would have the effect of raising London's proportion of such grants from about 18 per cent. to over 25 per cent and will he say whether the total increase in the grants to London proposed under that scheme would have amounted to over£1,000,000 per annum.
In the Report signed by the majority of members of the Royal Commission it was recommended that certain new and increased grants should be paid through the Local Taxation Account to the local authorities throughout England and Wales, and it was estimated that the additional cost to the Exchequer would be about £2,500,000 a year. So far as I am aware, the Report did not show how much of this additional relief would accrue to London, or how London's share of the total grants would be affected.
Local Taxation—Estate Duty
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has taken stops to ascertain whether the proportion of Estate Duty payable into the Local Taxation (England and Wales) Account under Section 19 of The Finance Act, 1904, has proved to be an adequate equivalent of the share of the Probate Duty formerly allocated to that account under Section 21 of The Local Government Act, 1888; and, if not, whether he would be prepared to make the necessary investigation, inasmuch as Exchequer contributions have already been paid to local authorities on the basis of this estimated equivalent for twelve years.
There is really no need for any investigation. Prior to 1894, what was paid to the Local Taxation (England and Wales) Account was four-fifths of the Probate Duty Grant, the Probate Duty Grant being one-half of the proceeds of the Probate Duties. As the Probate Duties were at the rate of 3 per cent. on personal property, when it exceeded £1,000 in value, and at lower rates on property of lesser value, the Probate Duty Grant was slightly under 1½per cent. on the aggregate amount of such property. Under the Act of 1894, the contribution is fixed at an amount equal to 1½ per cent on the aggregate amount of such property, and therefore must have been slightly in excess of the contribution that would have been made on the ante 1894 basis. As a matter of fact, the contribution to the Local Taxation Account for England and Wales has, since 1894, averaged more than £100,000 per annum in excess of the average contribution for the five years 1889–1893, and, in addition, an average of £125,000 a year has, during the last seven years, been paid in relief of rates on Tithe Rent Charge under the Act of 1899.
Care Of The Feeble-Minded
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, pending the production of the Report of the Royal Commission on the Care and Control of the Feeble-minded, and pending legislation founded on the said Report, he will take any steps to supplement the Lunacy Commission so as to relieve the existing congestion in the Department and to procure adequate inspection of asylums.
The number of the Lunacy Commissioners is fixed by statute, and while I am fully alive to the fact that the great increase in the duties which they have to carry out has caused a considerable congestion of business, to meet which an addition to their staff may be required, I could not initiate legislation pending the presentation of the Report of the Royal Commission.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that two or three of the Commissioners have had to find substitutes, and those substitutes had no special qualification for the office?
I am afraid I can add nothing to my Answer.
Edalji Case
*
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, before the Home Office Vote is taken, he will print all the police reports and communications which have been addressed to the Home Office on the subject of Edalji since the outrages commenced to the present day.
No, Sir. As I intimated in reply to several Questions yesterday, I do not propose to publish any further Papers in connection with this case.
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police reports upon the Edalji case care now in existence which have not been shown to him or his friends; and whether any of them were before the Edalji Committee.
No police reports have been shown to Mr. Edalji or to his friends. All the documents in the possession of the Home Office were submitted to Sir Arthur Wilson and his colleagues.
Compensation For Wrongful Imprisonment
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will lay Papers showing the sentences passed upon and the periods of imprisonment undergone by all persons who have received compensation in respect of such sentences and imprisonment in the last twenty years.
If the hon. Member will be good enough to put this down as an unstarred Question, I shall be glad to give him the information asked for without mentioning the names of the persons compensated.
Street Trading By Girls
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will grant a Return of the local authorities which have made by-laws under the Employment of Children Act, 1903, and the names of those authorities which have framed regulations prohibiting street trading by girls under sixteen years of age.
I hope to issue later in the year a full Report on the working of the Act, which will include the information for which my hon. friend asks. If, however, he desires to have the particulars he mentions in advance the Return can be granted.
British Commercial Travellers Abroad
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that in nearly every foreign country a British commercial traveller has to obtain a costly licence before he can solicit a single order for British goods; if any corresponding duty is levied upon the agents of foreign firms for the privilege of soliciting orders in the United Kingdom for foreign goods; and, in the contrary case, if he will endeavour to bring about free interchange of practice.
I would refer the hon. Member to the memorandum entitled "Commercial Travellers" issued last year as a Command Paper (Cd. 3241), from which he will see that the licences required to be taken out can only be described as "costly" in the case of comparatively few of the more important countries. The charge for licences is in all cases the same for travellers of all foreign nationalities, and there is no differentiation against British travellers. No licence is required to be taken out by foreign commercial travellers in the United Kingdom. The attention of the Board of Trade has on various occasions been directed to this matter, and such steps as seemed possible have already been taken with a view to the reduction of the charges in the case of certain countries, but without any satisfactory result at present. The matter, however, will continue to receive attention.
Ss "Ethelburga"
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the steamer "Ethelburga" engaged a crew at the port of Glasgow on the 7th June, and that only two qualified able seamen wore engaged; whether he can state if the superintendent at Glasgow reported this case to the Board of Trade surveyor; and whether the surveyor was of the opinion that the ship was fully and properly manned by qualified men.
I find that the deck hands engaged on the "Ethelburga" on the 7th instant were one boatswain, two A.B.'s, three seamen, one ordinary seaman, one apprentice. As the manning complied with the minimum requirements, the case was not referred to the surveyors, and no report has been made by them with regard to it.
Will the right hon. Gentleman define what he means by "three seamen." I assume they must be either A.B.'s or ordinary seamen.
Three ordinary seamen, certainly.
Ss "Moorfield"
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the steamer "Moorfield" engaged a crew at the port of Cardiff on the 4th June, 1907; whether he is aware that on the previous voyage the "Moorfield" had as deck hands six able seamen and one ordinary seaman; whether he is aware that on the present voyage the number of able seamen has been reduced to five; and whether the superintendent at Cardiff reported this case to the Board of Trade surveyor that it might be ascertained as to whether the vessel was seaworthy with regard to the manning.
The facts are as stated by the hon. Member, but on the previous voyage three out of the six A.B.'s did not produce proof of their title to that rating. It was not necessary to refer the present case to the surveyors with regard to under manning, as the minimum requirements as to manning were complied with.
S S "Adelina Patti"
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on 3rd June, 1907, a crew was engaged for the steamship "Adelina Patti," at Newport, Monmouthshire; that only three qualified A.B.'s were signed on the articles of the ship; and that on the previous voyage the steamship "Adelina Patti" carried six A.B.'s; whether he can state if the superintendent at Newport directed the Board of Trade surveyor's attention to the manning of the steamship "Adelina Patti"; and whether any steps were taken to ascertain whether the steamer was manned by an efficient crew.
I find that a boatswain, three A.B., and three ordinary seamen at the full A.B. rate of wages were engaged on the "Adelina Patti" on the 3rd instant. The vessel had more than the minimum number of deck hands required, and the case was not referred to the surveyor. On the previous voyage this vessel carried a boatswain and six A.B.'s.
Is the right hon. Gentleman of opinion that three able seamen are sufficient for a vessel of this tonnage?
This matter was very carefully considered by a Committee of this House some time ago, and regulations were framed in compliance with its recommendation. I am told that this vessel has complied with these requirements.
To what regulations is the right hon. Gentleman referring?
The regulations made under the Act of 1897 by the Board of Trade.
Are we to understand that these regulations allow a vessel of this tonnage to proceed to sea with less than six qualified able seamen?
I am not quite sure as to the tonnage of this vessel. I will look into that matter. My hon. friend knows perfectly well what the regulations are, and our surveyor reports that in this case the regulations were complied with.
Ss "Resolute"
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that a crew was engaged for the steamer "Resolute" on the 6th June at the port of Sunderland; whether he is aware that this vessel only engaged three qualified able seamen; whether he can state if the superintendent reported the matter to the Board of Trade surveyor at the above port; an I what action, if any, was taken.
I find that the deck hands engaged on the "Resolute" on the 10th instant were one boatswain, three A.B.'s, one ordinary seaman, and two deck hands. The two last served in the ship on the previous voyage as A.B.'s, but could not be entered as A.B.'s on the present voyage as they were unable to prove their title to that rating. The manning complied with the minimum requirements, and it was there-I fore not necessary to report the case to the surveyor or to take any special action with regard to it.
Maintenance Of Non-Provided School Buildings
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been drawn to the diversity in the practice of various local education authorities with regard to payments made by them for wear and tear in non provided school buildings and the sums apparently paid by some authorities in excess of their legal obligation; whether he will obtain a Return from all local education authorities showing the methods they adopt both in assessing the amount of their liability and in discharging it; and whether he will issue a general circular giving the authorities such; directions as will secure that the practice is uniform throughout the country, and that expenditure under this head is kept within strictly legal limits.
My right hon. friend has asked me to answer this Question. The matter to which it relates has been brought before the Local Government Board and the Board of Education in various forms during the last few years, and the Board of Education issued a circular with regard to it in May, 1904, intimating the view of the Local Government Board that a local education authority cannot legally enter into contracts with school managers for the commutation of the expenses of maintenance for which the local education authority are liable. The Education Act, 1902, leaves, however, a certain amount of discretion to local education authorities with regard to the amount which they will pay on account of wear and tear in non-provided schools. I have no authority to give directions which would have the effect of securing a uniform practice throughout the country in this matter, and it does not appear to me that there would be any advantage in obtaining a Return on the subject. If in any particular case it is considered that the action of the local education authority is illegal, it can be raised at the audit of their accounts.
Poor Law Expenditure
I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is now able to state the expenditure out of loans on Poor Law administration for England and Wales down to March, 1906, it being now fifteen months since the end of that financial year and, if so, will he state the amount of expenditure out of loans and the amount of expenditure not out of loans, but including the expenditure of the Metropolitan Asylums Board, respectively.
The total expenditure of Poor Law Authorities for purposes connected with the relief of the poor during the your ended March, 1906, was approximately as follows:—Expenditure out of loans, £998,000; Expenditure not out of loans, £14,036,000. These figures include that portion of the expenditure of the Metropolitan Asylums Board which did not relate exclusively to their hospitals for infectious disease.
Local Taxation Grants—London's Share
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the amounts of London's share of the Local Taxation (England and Wales) Account in 1889–90 and 1905–6; what were the deductions made from those amounts in each of those years respectively and paid to the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police district; what were the amounts, in each of those years respectively, of the grants which the London County Council are compelled to make out of the Exchequer Contribution Account to guardians of the poor, metropolitan borough councils, public vaccinators, and other authorities respectively; what were the net amounts, in each of those years respectively, left in the Exchequer Contribution Account of the London County Council and available for the reduction of the general county rate; what were the amounts of the other grants and payments which the London County Council is required, under the Local Government Act, 1888, to make to local authorities out of the general county account; and what was the final effect upon the finances of the London County Council in each year.
My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this Question, but I must point out that the information desired by the hon. Member cannot conveniently be dealt with by means of an Answer to a Question; but if, as I presume, his object is to show that the amounts which the London County Council are required to pay to other authorities in London out of the Exchequer Contribution Account and otherwise has considerably increased in the period to which he refers, I may state generally that this is no doubt the case.
London Medical Officers' Salaries
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that the discontinued grants towards the salaries of medical officers of health and sanitary inspectors were made under the Public Health Act of 1875, which does not apply to London, and that consequently London received no share in these grants; that, notwithstanding this fact, the grant was included in the basis adopted for the distribution of a large part of the grants from the Local Taxation (England and Wales) Account under the Local Government Act, 1888; and that from 1888 to the present time the London County Council has in effect received no grant in respect of sanitary officers, but has been required by Parliament to pay to the metropolitan borough councils one-half the salaries of the medical officers of health and sanitary inspectors employed by them with the approval of the Local Government Board, he can state the additional amount which London would have received from the Local Taxation Account if the sanitary officers grant had been excluded from the basis of distribution fixed in 1888.
Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this Question. I am aware of the facts referred to in it. The grant in respect of the salaries of provincial medical officers of health and inspectors of nuisances was one of the discontinued grants on the basis of which county and county borough councils outside London have shared in some of the moneys payable out of the Local Taxation Account. Had the grant been excluded from the basis and no other variation in the scheme been made, the county and borough councils outside London would have received less and London would have received more. Calculations have been made showing that on the altered basis about £295,000 would have changed hands, as between the provinces and London, during the period from 1889 to 1907.
London's Poor Law Grants
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the grants made by the London County Council to the guardians of the poor out of the Exchequer Contribution Account have steadily increased from £146,377 in 1889–90 to £248,993 in 1905–6; that the£ grants paid by the London County Council to the metropolitan borough councils in respect of sanitary officers have increased from £131 in 1889–90 to £34,440 in 1905–6; that the balance of London's Exchequer Contribution Account, available for the relief of the county rate, has fallen from£203,547 in 1889–90 and£280,721 in 1891–2 to£53,333 in 1905–6, representing a Joss of more than Id. in the pound to the general county rate; and whether, in revising the bases of the Local Taxation Account, he will consider the desirability of providing means to prevent the charges upon London's share increasing in a much greater ratio than the amount of that share itself.
My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this Question. I am not able to follow the precise figures given by the hon. Member, but there is no doubt that the sums paid by the London County Council to boards of guardians and sanitary authorities in respect of grants have largely increased between 1889–90 and 1905–6, and that the balance of the Exchequer Contribution Account available for general county purposes has diminished. As the Government have already intimated, the share which London should receive from the Local Taxation Account will be carefully considered when the Government come to deal with the question of the relations between the Exchequer and Local Taxation as a whole.
Grantown Telephone
I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he has yet come to a decision as to the best means of providing telephonic communication with Grantown; and, if so, when it is expected that operations will be commenced.
The best means of providing telephonic communication with Grantown would be by a new line from Inverness. The line might be useful also as forming part of a direct route for the main trunk lines between Inverness and the South, but the cost would be great and further inquiry is necessary before definite proposals can be made. It may be necessary to ask for a guarantee in respect of the expense of serving Grantown before the work can be undertaken.
Swedish Telephones
I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he is aware that his Department have recently taken out the old telephones in the Medomsley district and replaced them with telephones made in Sweden; and, if so, will he state the reason for such change, and also the price and efficiency of the now ones compared with the old.
The telephones referred to by the hon. Member were some in stock of a more modern pattern than the old ones. All such instruments now supplied to the Post Office are of British manufacture.
Education Code—Secondary School Education
On behalf on the hon. Member for the Tewkesbury Division of Gloucestershire, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education when it is expected that the new Regulations dealing with secondary schools will be circulated. I beg also to ask the President of the Board of Education when the new Code will be in the hands of Members.
In reply to these two Questions, I hope both sots of Regulations will be in the hands of the printers next week, and they will be circulated as soon as the necessary supply can be delivered.
West Riding Judgment
I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether £428 8s., the costs of the West Riding County Council of their unsuccessful litigation on the question of teachers' salaries has been paid by the Government; if so, by what authority, statutory or otherwise, this payment has been made; and whether any agreement had been made upon the matter before the Government appealed to the House of Lords.
Perhaps I may be allowed to reply to this Question. The taxed costs of the West Riding County Council Amounted to £483 8s. 0d., and were defrayed from the Vote for law charges under Treasury sanction. The answer to the last paragraph is in the negative.
Queen Victoria Memorial
I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he can give any indication when the memorial to Her late Majesty Queen Victoria is likely to be completed.
This work is not in my Department, and I am unable to give any definite information, but I am told that the sculpture is progressing satisfactorily.
Which Department is responsible?
No Department at all. The matter is being managed by a committee representing the subscribers.
Supplementary Estimates
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if any supplementary Estimates, in addition to that dealing with Jamaica, will be presented during the present session.
Yes, Sir; but I cannot say how many at present.
Trawling In Weymouth Bay
I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether he is aware that, owing to the inaction of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, more than 100 licensed watermen have for a long time been prevented from earning a livelihood by trawling in Weymouth Bay; and will he say when the Board will confirm the by-laws which wore made by the Southern Sea Fisheries Committee so long ago as the 20th September, 1905, and the suitability of which has been proved in evidence at the public inquiries held in relation to such by-laws.
The delay in arriving at a decision in this case has been due to the fact that since the original proposal was made in 1905 several alternative or counter proposals have been placed before the Board, and it has been necessary to hold three public inquiries and to make other local investigations, which wore only completed last month. We are now in communication with the Committee, as required by the Act, with reference to the exact form of the by-laws, and, so far as the Board are concerned, there will be no delay in bringing the matter to a conclusion.
Scottish Public Parks
I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if his attention has been called to the fact that many burghs in Scotland assess their ratepayers for the purchase and upkeep of public parks, and then charge these same ratepayers for admission to entertainments in these parks; whether he is aware that this is contrary to Section 14, subsection 3, of the Burgh Police Act of 1903; and if he will take steps to see the law carried out in future.
*
I shall be glad to have from my hon. friend the particulars on which he bases his statement that many burghs in Scotland follow the practice alleged. My attention has not been called to it. I may, however, point out that the legality of such actings is a question proper for decision by the Civil Courts at the instance of any party having a legal interest.
Duke Street Prison, Glasgow
I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if his attention has been called to the fact that, by the Report of the Prison Commissioners of Scotland for 1906, fifty-nine men were punished in Duke Street Prison, Glasgow, for refusal to work, while in the same prison 145 men were punished by being deprived of work; if these were the same men at different periods; and if the punishment of deprival of work has been found such a success as to warrant its continuance.
I have considered the facts stated in the Report. The fifty-nine wore included in the 145. The Prison Commissioners consider the punishment of the deprival of work a good punishment and find it to be generally effective.
Irish Grazing Farm Dispute Prosecutions
I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether, having regard to the frequent assertions made by the disturbers of the peace in the West of Ireland that the Government really supports and approves of the, agitation against owners of grass farms, the Law Officers intend personally to conduct any of the pending prosecutions in Roscommon or Galway, with a view to making it clear that the aforesaid assertions are not well founded; and will Mr. Attorney-General or Mr. Solicitor-General conduct the prosecution in the Ballinagleragh case in county Leitrim.
It seems to have escaped the hon. Member's notice that before this Question appeared my right hon. friend the Chief Secretary stated in this House that it is the intention of the Law Officers to conduct personally the prosecutions at assizes in at all events some of the cases referred to. I am not prepared to say in what particular cases my hon. friend or myself will prosecute That will be a matter for my consideration in due course.
Cooscroum Pier
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the resolution adopted by the Cahirciveen Rural District Council, on the 6th instant, with reference to the construction of a pier at Cooscroum; and whether any, and if so, what steps will be taken by the Congested Districts Board to comply with the request contained in the resolution.
I have received the resolution referred to, and the subject of it has been carefully considered by the Congested Districts Board. Having regard to the state of their funds, the Board find it impossible to undertake the construction of the proposed works at Cooscroum during the present year.
Belfast Civil Bill Appeals
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that between the mouth of July and the month of March there is no Court available for hearing civil bill appeals for the city of Belfast; that during such interval decrees of the Recorder appealed against are rendered inoperative; that, with the object of remedying this grievance, it was arranged four years ago that civil business and civil bill appeals should be heard at the winter assize, which is held in Belfast in December in each year; that, at the first sitting of such Court in December, 1903, Chief Baron Palles decided that there was no power under the existing Acts of Parliament to hear civil bill appeals at such Court, and that an Act of Parliament was necessary to confer jurisdiction for such purpose; that no step has since been taken for the purpose of conferring on such winter Assize Court the necessary jurisdiction to. hear civil bill appeals; and whether he will take into consideration the question of introducing.at an early date a Bill conferring the necessary jurisdiction on the Judges of such. Court of Assize.
I understand that the facts are substantially as stated in the Question, but the hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that no step has been taken with the object of providing that civil business may be heard at winter assizes at Belfast. The Supreme Court of Judicature (Ireland) Bill, which was introduced last session by my right hon. friend the Attorney-General for Ireland, contained a provision to that effect, but the Bill failed to become law. It is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill containing a like provision when opportunity offers, but in the present state of public business it does not seem probable that the Bill can he brought in during the present session.
Turoe Outrage
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether on the night of the 9th instant the residence of Mr. H. Dolphin, at Turoe, county Galway, was fired into; and, if so, whether any person has been arrested in connection with the matter.
Mr. Dolphin's house was not fired into, but out of. No person has been arrested.
Mr P J Kelly, J P
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what decision he has arrived at with reference to the speech of Mr. P. J. Kelly, J.P., delivered at New Inn, county Galway, on 2nd inst., in which he incited his hearers to treat Lord Ashtown in the same way as John Blake, who was shot dead in 1883, was treated; and whether Mr. Kelly is still a justice of the peace.
It has been decided to institute criminal proceedings in this case. Under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1898, Mr. Kelly is a justice of the peace by virtue of his office as chairman of a rural district council.
Is Mr. Kelly to be deprived of his office of justice of the peace?
Pending the proceedings it would obviously be improper to take any action in the matter.
Cappawhite Evicted Tenant
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether Thomas Franklin, of Ballykevoen, Cappawhite, county Tipperary, who was evicted from his holding about eighteen years ago by his landlord, the late Valentine Ryan, of Chadville, Cappawhite, county Tipperary, has yet boon reinstated; is he aware that the estates of the late Valentine Ryan in the counties of Tipperary and Limerick were sold to the tenants about seven years since; can he say whether an inspector has been sent from the Estates Commissioners to Thomas Franklin to inquire into the particulars of his eviction; and will he instruct the Estates Commissioners to approach Mrs. Helena Ryan, widow of the deceased Valentine Ryan, or his executors, Dr. Barry, of Thurles, and Thomas Kenny, solicitor, of George Street, Limerick, with the view of arranging for the reinstatement of Franklin.
The Estates Commissioners have inquired into Thomas Franklin's case, but have not been able to effect his reinstatement. The present owner of the land from which Franklin was evicted has been approached by the Commissioners, but so far has not consented to his reinstatement. The Commissioners have placed Franklins name upon the list of applicants suitable to receive an allotment of land if it can be obtained.
Castlewaller Evicted Tenant
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he say whether Thomas Molony, of Castlewaller, Now-port, county Tipperary, evicted a few years since by his landlord, John B. Barrington, has as yet been reinstated; is he aware that John B. Barrington, when only agent on the property to Captain Hamilton, before his having purchased the estate over the heads of the tenants, induced the late Michael Molony, brother and predecessor in tenancy of Thomas Molony, to exchange the tenancy under which he and his people before him hold the farm form any years from a leasehold into an eleven months one, thereby shutting him out from the benefits of the Act of 1881; and will the Estates Commissioners use their best endeavours to enable Molony to be reinstated and admitted to purchase, as the other tenants on the property who have purchased for the past few years.
The Estates Commissioners have investigated Thomas Molony's application for reinstatement and have decided to take no action in the case. It has been judicially decided that the lands in which Molony seeks reinstatement are demense lands, and moreover it appears that the applicant is already in possession of a holding of about fifty acres.
Grazing-Farm Disputes In Ireland
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can inform the House how many grazing farms have been surrendered since 25th May, and of these how many have been surrendered owing to pressure from the United Irish League; whether all the farms on the Caheroyan lands are now unoccupied; and whether this land is shortly to be sold to the Estates Commissioners.
As regards the first part of the Question, I would refer to my Answer to the right hon. Member for South Dublin on 30th May.† I am informed that the grazing farms on the Caheroyan estate are now unoccupied. The Estates Commissioners have had the estate inspected, and have entered into negotiations with the object of purchasing it. The negotiations are pending.
Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is intended to prohibit the Estates Commissioners from granting holdings on these farms to any persons arrested for intimidation?
† (4) Debates, clxxv., 92.
That is a matter I have already replied to in answer to former Questions.
What is the meaning of the statement of Lord Crewe in another place?
*
Order, order! The hon. Member must know that that is irregular.
Surely, Sir, when a member of the Government in one place makes a statement, and another member of the Government in the other place makes another statement diametrically opposed to it, we are entitled to an explanation?
*
Differences of expression continually occur, not only as between members of the Government in the two Houses, but also in this House.
Colonial Trade With Ireland
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in considering the recommendations made by the Board of Trade Commercial Intelligence Committee, to which reference is made in the current Journal of the Board of Trade, he will endeavour to secure that the self-governing Colonies furnish information as to the extent and character of their trade with Ireland.
The point referred to shall not be lost sight of, but, as my hon. friend is doubtless aware, any commercial agents appointed by us in the Colonies would have no control over the form of the Official Trade Accounts issued by the Colonial Governments.
Irish Education
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to the statement on page 118 of the recently issued special Report on educational subjects, Vol. 17, that if in Ireland some Father Mathew could initiate a high-school crusade, with something of the Danish enthusiasm, Ireland's day of prosperity would have come indeed; whether the writer of the Report has any acquaintance with educational affairs in Ireland, and in particular with the work of the Gaelic League in enthusiastically promoting the study of the language, history, and poetry of Ireland on the lines sketched out by Bishop Grundtvig in founding the Danish high schools; and can he say whether the Board of Education assumes responsibility for giving currency to a statement which deliberately ignores the existence of an Irish intellectual and educational movement.
I must refer the hon. Member to the last sentence in the Prefatory Note to the volume in question, which reads as follows:— "In this case, as always, the Board must not be taken as necessarily endorsing the opinions of the author; the responsibility for these is his, and his alone."
Allotment Of Parliamentary Time
I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the block of legislation both in the House and the Standing Committees, he would consider the expediency of appointing a Committee of the House to apportion the time to be allowed for the discussion of particular measures and parts thereof in the Committee stage in the House and in the Standing Committees.
I have already expressed my own view and that of the Government in regard to this matter. We are entirely favourable to the establishment of a Committee of Public Business. But the demands made upon the time of the House in connection with other questions of procedure have, as I have already informed the House, left us no opportunity for taking steps to set up a Committee of the kind.
Business Of The House
May I ask what Bills will be taken next Friday?
said the business on Friday would be, first, the Small Holdings Bill (Finance Resolution in Committee), then the Second Reading stage of the Telegraph (Money) Bill, British North America Bill, Australian States Constitution Bill, and the Evidence (Colonial Statutes) Bill. The next orders would be the Criminal Appeal Bill (Finance Resolution in Committee), and the Motion regarding a new Judge, and there might be other Bills.
I understand-that the Under-Secretary for the Colonies says the British North America Bill must pass by the 1st July. In that case, would it not be better to put it earlier in the list—the responsibility for passing it, of course, rests with the Government.
I will consider whether the Bill may not be put higher in the list.
Public Accounts Committee
First Report brought up, and read.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 205.]
Vaccination Bill
Reported, with Amendments, from Standing Committee C.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 204.]
Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed.[No. 204.]
Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration upon Thursday, and to be printed. [Bill 245.]
Selection (Standing Committees)
reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee A: Mr. T. W. Russell; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Rendall.
further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee A (added in respect of the Married Women's Property Bill): Sir Edward Boyle; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Married Women's Property Bill): Viscount Turnour.
further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee A (in respect of the Married Women's Property Bill): Mr. Attorney-General; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Married Women's Property Bill): Mr. Solicitor-General.
further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee A (added in respect of the Incest Bill): Mr. Goddard Clarke; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. William Pearce (in respect of the Incest Bill).
further reported from the Committee; That they had added to Standing Committee A the following Fifteen Members (in respect of the Leeds (South Parade Chapel) Charity, the Kingswood (Whitfield Tabernacle, Schoolroom, &c.) Charity, the Longton (Caroline Street Chapel) Charity, and the Board of Education (Hulme Trust Estates Educational) Confirmation Bills):—Mr. Burdett-Coutts, Mr. Barran. Mr. Billson, Mr. O'Neill, Mr. Lewis Haslam, Mr. Chiozza Money, Mr. Hay Morgan, Sir Henry Seymour King, Mr. Everett, Mr. Liddell, Mr. Leicester Harmsworth, Mr. Whitwell Wilson, Mr. Marnham, Mr. William Jones, and Mr. Watt.
further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee C: Mr. Walter Long, Earl Percy, and Mr. Abel Smith; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Cave, Mr. George Faber, and Mr. Gretton.
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDON: further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee C (in respect of the Small Holdings and Allotments Bill): Mr. Lloyd-George, Mr. Kearley, Mr. Idris, Mr. Hart-Davies, Mr. Ainsworth, Mr. Findlay, Mr. Duckworth, Mr. James Duncan, Mr. Paul, Sir Albert Spicer, Sir Philip Magnus, and Mr. Thornton; and had appointed in I substitution: Mr. Harcourt, Mr. Solicitor-General, Mr. Masterman, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Rowlands, Mr. Leif Jones, Mr. Essex, Mr. Nussey, Major Dunne, Mr. Montagu, Mr. Lane-Fox, and Mr. Bridgeman.
further reported from the Committee; That they had added to Standing Committee C the following Fifteen Members (in respect of the Small Holdings and Allotments Bill): Mr. Nicholls, Mr. George Roberts, Mr. Chaplin, Mr. Jesse Collings, Mr. Courthope, Mr. Hicks Beach, Mr. Ernest Gardner, Mr. Burns, Mr. Lambert, Sir Walter Foster, Mr. Dudley Ward, Mr. Winfrey, Sir John Dickson-Poynder, Mr. Grant, and Mr. Ellis Davies.
further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Member from the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills (added in respect of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Bill): Lord Willoughby de Eresby: and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Bill): Mr. Starkey.
Reports to lie upon the Table.
Monastic And Conventual Institutions
asked leave, under the ten minutes rule, to introduce a Bill to appoint a Commission to inquire as to the need for the inspection of monastic and conventual institutions.
rose to a point of order and asked whether the motion of the hon. Member did not amount to an abuse of the rules of the House. A year ago the hon. Member brought forward the same Bill, and he wished to call attention to Mr. Speaker's ruling on the point then raised by the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool. Mr. Speaker, speaking on that occasion, said that the frequent repetition of the use of the form of introducing Bills would have a tendency to become an abuse, but so long as it was only put into use occasionally it could not amount to an abuse of the forms of the House.
*
I do not think I can hold that a Member bringing in a Bill once a year amounts to an abuse of the rules of the House.
But it is an abuse of the ten minutes rule.
*
If the time of the House was constantly being occupied by private Members making speeches under cover of bringing in Bills under the ten minutes rule then it would be an abuse; but as far as I can recollect we have not yet bad a speech from the hon. Member for North Down, and I think he is entitled to introduce his Bill.
I regret to have to inform you we had to endure a speech from the hon. Member upon this i subject twelve mouths ago.
said he had not made a speech on the subject before, because on the last occasion he was so interrupted by hon. Members below the gangway that he was unable to do so. He felt therefore that he was entitled to make another appeal to the House to reconsider the decision they then took, but he would not occupy even the narrow limits allowed under the ton minutes rule. First of all he wished the House to understand that the Bill was not a Party one, and he looked forward to, and, indeed, expected, as much support from the opposite side of the House as he would got from his own. He did not expect much support from the Front Benches on either side, because those in power on the Front Bench generally voted against the Bill, and those on the Opposition side abstained from voting altogether. The only Loader he could remember as having voted for him upon the issue was one whose absence he was sure they all deeply deplored, viz., the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham. The Bill proposed that a Commission should be appointed to inquire into the need for inspection of conventual and monastic institutions. There were now, in connection with the Roman Catholic Church alone, twenty of those institutions for every one that existed fifty years ago. There were also, as recent events had proved, a very large number in connection with the Church of England. He had no desire to say one bitter or provocative word about the Roman Catholic Church or the Ritualistic section of the Church of England, nor did he wish to say anything against the idea of monastic or conventual life. He believed in absolute liberty being given to every man and woman to worship God according to his or her lights. What he did say was that no man or woman should be held in bondage against his or her will. That was a state of things which existed in no other country, except Spain, and even there was a kind of partial instruction given. He trusted that no individual would be invested with power to keep in bondage young men and women who had entered such a state of living, without, perhaps, having fully considered what the circumstances of that life were. He appealed with confidence to that sense of justice and love of freedom which he believed were characteristics of the British race. He was quite sure, taking into account a! I the facts, which were well known to anyone who had studied the subject, that the Bill would be approved by the House.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to appoint a Commission to inquire as to the need for the inspection of Monastic and Conventual Institutions." —( Mr. T. L. Corbett.)
thought it would have occurred to most hon. Members that it was strange, to say the least of it, if the hon. Member for North Down was so anxious to have legislation passed on the subject dealt with by his Bill, that he had deferred its introduction until so late in the session. He could not have the slightest expectation that, under any circumstances whatever, the Bill could become law this year, even if it received the support of every Member of the House, which it did not. Therefore, he thought that many hon. Members would be forced to the conclusion that the hon. Member had introduced his Bill without any hope of its making progress or becoming law, but that it had been introduced rather in the nature of a demonstration which was now becoming to be regarded as an annual institution. Exactly twelve months ago the hon. Member introduced a similar measure, and his speech upon that occasion was somewhat similar to the statement they had just heard. Leave to introduce the Bill was then refused by an enormous majority. He had not the slightest doubt that a majority equally large would register the same opinion when a division was taken that afternoon. The hon. Member for North Down had appealed to hon. Members opposite on the ground that the Bill was not a Party measure nor intended to give offence to any sec