asked Mr. Attorney General, Whether Sir Bryen O'Loghlen, Member for Clare County, having since his election accepted an emolumentary office under the Crown, as Her Majesty's Attorney General for Victoria, has not thereby vacated his seat in this House?

Sir, the Question whether an hon. Gentleman who has been elected a Member of this House has vacated his seat is one which it is for the House itself to decide. I therefore hope my hon. and learned Friend will not think me discourteous if I decline at present to commit myself to an opinion upon a point as to which, when it comes to be investigated by the House, I shall be called upon, as one of the Law Officers of the Crown, to advise either the House or the Government.

gave Notice, that on Wednesday he would ask the date of the appointment of Sir Bryen O'Loghlen to the appointment of Attorney General in Victoria; what salary was attached to the position; and, whether the hon. Baronet had accepted the Office?

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, To explain the position of General Richard Strachey as regards the civil and military emoluments drawn by him and offices held; whether, being a member of the Council of India, it has been proposed to appoint him to serve on the Council of the Governor General, and to be President of the Famine Commission, and to draw Indian Allowances, and to what amount for these Indian offices, also to retain his seat on the Home Council, continuing to draw the pay of that office; and, whether the Papers relating to these various changes will be laid upon the Table?

Sir, General Richard Strachey has accepted the post of Financial Member of the Council of the Governor General of India during the temporary absence of his brother, Sir John Strachey. He has in consequence resigned his seat upon the Council of the Secretary of State in England. With regard to the Famine Commission, of which he was appointed President some time ago, the arrange- ments are entirely under the control of the Government of India, and I am not aware whether any change will be rendered necessary by his temporary acceptance of other duties.

said, the hon. Gentleman had not answered the latter part of the Question, as to whether Papers relating to this question would be laid on the Table?

At present, Sir, there are no Papers whatever.

asked the honourable Baronet the junior Member for Mid-Surrey, Whether he intends to proceed with his Motion with reference to Kew Gardens during the present Session?

, in reply, said, that he stood in this position. He had an excellent opportunity of bringing on his Motion for the earlier opening of Kew Gardens on the 7th of June, the day before the Whitsuntide Recess. On speaking the day before to his hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury and his right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works, he found that it would be more convenient to them that he should postpone his Motion until after the Recess, and, consequently, he withdrew it on the 7th, on the distinct condition and understanding that the Parks Vote would be taken on the 13th of June, so as to enable him to bring the question forward on that day. He was sorry to say that his hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury did not find it convenient to carry out his engagement, nor had he in the month which had since elapsed given him the opportunity he promised. He was sure, however, that his hon. Friend was anxious to keep faith, and not to lay himself open to the charge of taking advantage of his (Sir Trevor Lawrence's) Parliamentary youth and innocence; and he confidently expected he would give him an early opportunity of bringing on the Motion.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he will give such Notice of his intention to move the discharge of the Order in relation to the Criminal Code (Indictable Offences) Bill, that an opportunity may be afforded for discussing the constitution of the proposed Commission for revising the Bill?

, in reply, said, he should undertake not to move to discharge the Order without first giving Notice; but he must not be understood to admit that any discussion was desirable.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether his attention has been directed to the success attendant upon the inoculation of cattle (at Campbeltown, in Argyleshire, and elsewhere) in preventing the spread of pleuro-pneumonia; and, whether he will consider the expediency of introducing a Clause in the Cattle Bill rendering such inoculation compulsory?

said, that experiments in the inoculation of cattle had been made for many years past in all parts of the world, and, although there were some instances in which they had proved successful, the result had not been so generally successful as to render inoculation at all certain, and in the circumstances, the Government were not prepared to introduce a clause into the Cattle Bill to render inoculation compulsory.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether his attention has been directed to the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the Board of Works (Ireland), especially to that portion which relates to the Northern Navigation System, in which the following sentence occurs:—

"We would recommend, therefore, that a Royal Commission, which would command public confidence, should be appointed by the Government;"

and, whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to appoint such a Royal Commission to inquire into the state of inland navigation in Ireland, more especially into that portion of it known as the Northern System?

Sir, my attention has been called to the Report, and I propose to have a clause very shortly under consideration. As yet I have not had an opportunity of forming a definite opinion on the Report, or to make any recommendations such as those to which the hon. Member refers. The question of the Irish navigation system will receive immediate attention.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to the frequency of fatal bathing accidents at Scarborough and other watering places; and, if he will consider the desirability of causing instructions to be issued to the authorities of Scarborough and other places where inhabitants derive large revenues directly and indirectly from bathing visitors, requesting them to station watch boats and life-saving apparatus in the neighbourhood of all bathing machines?

Sir, neither my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary's attention nor my own has been called officially to the frequency of fatal bathing accidents, though, of course, I am aware that such lamentable events do occur. With regard, however, to Scarborough, I am informed by the Mayor that the place had enjoyed an immunity from fatal bathing accidents for 14 years till last year, when two of them occurred. The town council had given their attention to the subject, and I have seen the regulations under which stands for bathing machines are now let. One of these requires that the proprietors of bathing machines shall provide a boat with life-buoy and requisite tackle constantly in readiness for the rescue of persons in danger. This will, I hope, be satisfactory to the hon. Gentleman. Under the Public Health Act the Local Government Board are in the constant habit of sanctioning bye-laws for the regulation of bathing; but I have no power to require the authorities to provide watch boats, nor have they the power to do so at the cost of the rates.

asked the Postmaster General, If he is aware that, in violation of an understanding come to by the Post Office authorities with an inhabitant of the parish of Finchley that no porterage should be charged on the delivery of telegraph messages (except at night), porterage is now charged; and, if he could explain why a telegraph office has not been established at Church End, Finchley, which contains a population of some thousands?

Sir, it is true that in 1874 an inhabitant of Church End, Finchley, was told that no porterage should be charged on the delivery of his telegrams during the day. But he was told so in error. Church End is more than a mile from the nearest telegraph office, and telegrams delivered there are legally liable to a charge of 6d. for porterage. No telegraph office has been opened at Church End, because the amount of telegraph business would not cover the expense.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he can inform the House on what day the Indian Budget will be brought forward?

Sir, the hon. Gentleman will be aware how difficult it is to fix a day for the Indian Budget; but, as far as I can calculate, it is very probable that we may be in a position to bring it forward this day fortnight.

asked the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, What is the present position of the proposed arrangement for the establishment of a Science and Art Museum in Dublin, and more especially for the acquisition of land for the holding of the Agricultural Shows heretofore held on the premises proposed to be taken for the purposes of the Museum?

Sir, negotiations are so far completed that we have made a definite offer to the Royal Dublin Society, by which they will be able to secure for the holding of the agricultural shows enlarged and more suitable premises than those now occupied by them in Leinster House. If the Society acquiesce in our proposals, we shall, having secured to them a place for their agricultural shows, be able to devote the whole premises of Leinster House to the purposes contemplated by the Dublin Art and Science Museum Act of last Session.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in the recent arrangements with Turkey, Her Majesty's Government have stipulated for the adoption and maintenance of "free trade" throughout the Turkish dominions?

Sir, the best answer I can give to the hon. Member is to refer him to the terms of the Treaty which has been laid on the Table of the House.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Emigration Treaty stated by Mr. Consul General Cowper, in his Despatch of May 13, to have been recently concluded between Spain and China; and, whether the Government can give any information with regard to such Treaty having been carried into effect, or any Despatches from Her Majesty's Ministers or Consuls in China on the subject?

, in reply, said, that according to the last Reports received from Madrid, the Spanish Government before ratifying the Treaty wished to make some alterations in it; and consequently he was not in a position to lay the Treaty on the Table at that moment. The Treaty had not been carried into effect. He would look through the Papers, and if there was anything of interest contained in them relating to this subject, he should have no objection to produce it.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, before the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Bill goes into Committee, he will be prepared to lay before the House the names of the Commissioners proposed to be appointed?

I do not think, Sir, it will be possible to lay the names of the Commissioners on the Table before the Bill goes into Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether Her Majesty's Government have any knowledge of a Treaty concluded, or about to be concluded between Germany and Holland, in virtue of which the Netherlands become part of the German Empire?

Certainly not, Sir. Her Majesty's Government have no knowledge of anything of the kind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with regard to the renewed obligations, entered into by the recent Treaty with the Porte, to protect against Russia the Asiatic dominions of the Sultan, Whether it is true Her Majesty's Government have agreed to yield to Russia the strong places by which those dominions are defended, such as Batoum, Ardahan, Kars, and the Soghanli Dagh?

Sir, I am not aware that Her Majesty's Government have consented to yield anything, and I think I must refer the noble Lord to the terms of the Treaty itself to see what the Powers have done. It will be laid on the Table of the House to-night; but I am afraid hon. Members will not get it until to-morrow afternoon, on account of the necessity of having it printed. Two maps have been placed, one in the Library of the House of Lords, and the other in the Library of this House, showing the effect of the Treaty so far as Europe is concerned. Other maps will follow, and maps will also be laid on the Table with the Treaty.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will state when he expects the Protocols will be laid on the Table?

Certainly before the end of the week. They are being prepared and will be completed as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether the recruiting sergeants of Line regiments have any right to interfere with the Militia regiments attached to them, as regards inducing men to enlist for the Line during the period their regiments are assembled for training; if he would state to whom the recruiting rewards for men enlisting into the line from Militia regiments are payable; and, whether any portion of such recruiting rewards can, under any circumstances, be claimed by the Line recruiters?

Sir, during the period of training of a Militia regiment, the Line sergeants are not permitted to interfere with the men with a view to inducing them to enlist into the Line. The recruiting rewards for men of the Militia enlisting during training periods are payable to the Staff of the Militia regiments. If any portion of the reward were claimed by the Line recruiters, it would certainly not be given them.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether it is the case that new regulations have been issued in the Navy with respect to Greenwich Hospital Pensions, and if he will state the nature of them; and, whether these regulations will curtail the prospective advantages to men now serving under the continuous service agreements, or if they are merely to apply prospectively to future entries?

Sir, new regulations have not yet been issued; but they have been approved by Her Majesty in Council, and will shortly be published. The nature of the regulations is to limit for the future the number of Greenwich Hospital age pensions in force at any one time to 7,500, originally estimated at 5,000, and also to limit to a total sum of 2s. 6d. a-day the amount of combined pensions which a man can receive from Greenwich and public funds. This change will not affect any persons who are already in receipt of Greenwich Hospital age pensions. The change is rendered necessary by the rapid increase which is going on in the charge for these pensions, which has grown from £46,500 in 1866–7 to £78,200 in 1878–9. The change will affect all men not at present in receipt of Greenwich age pensions; but the regulations for the grant of Greenwich Hospital age pensions does not form any part of the conditions under which men enter the Navy for continuous service.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether, with the view of establishing uniformity in the brake system on the great lines which interchange traffic, he would invite the Railway Companies to agree to a competitive trial of the several brakes now in use, the trial to take place under the superintendence of the Board of Trade, so that a definite decision may be come to on the subject?

Sir, I do not think it would be within the functions of the Board of Trade to initiate a competitive trial of the brakes now in use; but if the railway companies should agree to institute such a trial, we shall be prepared to give them every assistance in our power, with the view of aiding them to bring the matter to a satisfactory conclusion with as little delay as possible. So many experiments have now been made, and so full an experience has now been gained, both at home and abroad, on this subject, that I cannot but express the opinion that the time has arrived for the railway companies to take immediate steps to come to a decision respecting the brake system; for there can be no doubt that the general adoption of a satisfactory system of continuous brakes is a matter of the greatest importance to the public.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been drawn to the very considerable number of small newspapers which are published in London and various English towns for the purpose of promoting a system of swindling under the guise of betting, and to the fact that the advertisement clauses of the Betting Acts are systematically evaded in these as well as in some more regular sporting papers, Metropolitan and Provincial; and, whether the Home Office will undertake the prosecution of some of these offenders, or if the Government has it in contemplation to introduce a measure for the establishment of public prosecutors?

, in reply, said, his attention had not been called to the small newspapers to which the hon. Member referred; but, on the Report of the Chief Commissioner of Police, a prosecution was undertaken in February last by the Treasury Solicitor, for the purpose of an example to future offenders.

I have no doubt, whatever may be the feelings of some hon. Members whose opportunities will be interfered with by this Motion, that the great majority of the House will be ready to accede to this, or indeed to any other Motion which would have the effect of putting an end to this already protracted Session. But I think that the House will expect before it passes this Resolution, that some information should be given to it with respect to the use which the Government intend to make of the additional time thus placed at their disposal. I do not propose to go through the list of Go- vernment measures in detail, and I am not prepared to say that there are, for this time of the year, any unusual number of Bills, with which progress has been made, which there is not any probability of passing. There are some measures on the Order Book, which it has long been quite evident the Government do not intend to press, and it is very desirable that they should take this opportunity of informing the House, as far as they are able, what measures it is intended to press and what are to be abandoned. Some of the most important Bills with which progress has been made are Bills relating to the subject of local government. The County Government Bill has been dropped for a very long time, and I believe it is understood that it is not the intention of the Government to persevere with it any further. There are the Highways and Valuation Bills, and I should doubt whether it would be possible for the Government to pass the latter of those measures this Session. I cannot help thinking that it is to be regretted that the Government should have introduced so many Bills relating to this matter, if it was not their intention to persevere with them, or if they had not a reasonable prospect of passing them; because, when a variety of measures are before the House together, there is a tendency to waste time, not only by the period actually occupied in the discussion of any particular measure, but because questions creep into the discussion as to other measures, and re-act upon it. I will not anticipate the statement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer is, doubtless, prepared to make, and I will leave it to hon. Members who take particular interest in the measures before the House to put questions to the Government respecting their further progress; but there is one other point to which I wish to refer before I sit down, and that is the answer which the right hon. Gentleman gave the other day with reference to the Motion standing in the name of my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich for to-morrow. The right hon. Gentleman stated that he would not be able to dispense with a Morning Sitting to-morrow so as to give my right hon. Friend the whole evening. Now, I think, considering the very great importance of the question which is to be raised by my right hon. Friend—and considering the large amount of time of the House which the Government are now about to appropriate, it would be very desirable if they could find it possible not to ask for a Morning Sitting to-morrow, but to give up the whole of Tuesday to the discussion of this Motion.

Sir, I have no wish to oppose the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but rather to give every facility for bringing the Session to a close; but when he asks the House to give up to the Government all the time usually devoted to Private Members' Business, I think I may fairly appeal to him to know what he will do to facilitate the passing of the Sunday Closing Bill for Ireland? That Bill has been in my charge all this Session; but it has really become the possession and property of the House, on account of the overwhelming majorities in its favour, and from the time which has been devoted to it. It is but reasonable for me to ask what course the Government intend to adopt with regard to it, especially as the House has already spent 54 hours on it? We none of us wish that all the time which has been spent on this Bill should be lost, and the Government will do wisely to get rid of the question this Session. I, therefore, appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to give us the assurance that this Bill will be read a third time at the earliest opportunity.

Sir, I do not intend to dwell beyond a very few words on the appeal made by my noble Friend, because I think it would appear as if my own personal convenience was involved in it; but I wish to point this out to the Government, that it may be right to consider why it is that the Motion of which I have given Notice has occurred at a period of the year when, undoubtedly, time is very scarce, and when it seems invidious to press the Government. The reason of the delay has been this—that whereas the Act was passed in India with extraordinary expedition on March 12, it was not until the beginning of July that any Papers were laid on the Table of this House. A discussion was begun—and I was not surprised at it—early in the month of March or April; but I myself made an appeal to hon. Members on this side of the House to waive any discussion, because the Papers were not in our hands, and we were not in a position to approach the subject satisfactorily. I could not have had the smallest conception that three or four months would elapse before we were to be placed in the possession of information on which we might proceed. I have no doubt this delay was owing to exceptional causes; but I think Her Majesty's Government will see that it does constitute a claim to afford such opportunities as they can for the discussion now that we have approached it. I wish to say one word on the appeal just made by the hon. Member for Roscommon (the O'Conor Don). With regard to that, I feel convinced that Her Majesty's Government, as men of sense and the regulators of the Business of the House, will give some encouragement to it; because it is really too formidable that Members of this House, whether they are approvers or opponents of the Bill, should look forward to a renewal in future years of the operations which we have gone through during the present Session. My hon. Friend says that nearly 60 hours have been consumed in the discussion upon this Bill. What is the meaning of that? It means that more than one-twentieth part of the entire time at the disposal of this House, for all subjects whatever, foreign and domestic, has been consumed in considering whether during the period of four years public-houses in Ireland shall be closed on Sunday. There is a disproportion in that which is very grievous, and it is quite evident that—I will not say the same obstinacy—the same gallantry and the same tenacity which have been exhibited during the present Session in opposing this Bill will not be wanting in future years. We should again find ourselves sitting here at 3 o'clock, at 5 o'clock, at 7 and 8 o'clock in the morning, unless we are permitted now to give a small amount of time for the disposal of it. I would venture to point out this—that if the Government intend to allow some reasonable opportunity to be devoted for this purpose, it will be very desirable that it should be done soon, because the subject is entirely new to the House of Lords, and it is one which the House of Lords has as much a right to entertain independently as we have. It is of the greatest importance that, if it goes there, it should go under circumstances when it can be properly discussed, and not in the crowd and hurry of the last days of the Session.

said, he would not presume to dictate to the Government what course they should take with regard to giving further facilities for the Bill of a private Member; but he must be allowed to make this remark—that perhaps in the history of Parliamentary proceedings there was not a single instance of so many facilities having been given to the promoters of a Private Bill as had been given to the hon. Member for Roscommon in relation to the Irish Sunday Closing Bill. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich had characterized the discussions which had taken place in opposition to that measure as an unprecedented waste of time; but he would ask him if the minority would have ventured to occupy all that time if it were not that they felt they were backed up by the great majority of the Irish people. The right hon. Gentleman spoke of majorities having been obtained in favour of the Bill; but, in reality, there had been only one majority registered on behalf of it, and that was the majority on the principle of the Bill on the Motion for its second reading; and he protested against the opposition which had been subsequently given to the measure being described as a useless waste of time, seeing that it had given an opportunity to the growing opinion of the people of Ireland to develop itself against the Bill, which it had done in a most unprecedented manner.

hoped that some distinct statement would be made as to the course which it was intended to follow with regard to the various Government Bills which were before the House relating to Ireland. He found that, at the present time, there were altogether in different stages of progress 33 Government measures on the Order Book of the House. Of these, a dozen, he thought, were Irish Bills. There were on the Paper for that evening five Government measures affecting Ireland, most of them for second reading; there were 72 Votes to be taken in Committee of Supply; the Indian Budget had not been touched; and a Supplemental Estimate was about to be brought forward. Under these circumstances, he thought it was not unreasonable to inquire, what Irish measures the Government intended to force on at that period of the Session?

hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider the propriety of dropping, for this Session, the Medical Act Amendment Bill, which had received considerable opposition from all parts of the House.

said, that a discussion must arise on the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill, through the fault of the Government in not having introduced the Corrupt Practices Bill, which they had promised year after year. They had distinctly assured the House last year that they would bring the Bill in early this Session; but, as yet, they had not redeemed their promises. The law as to corrupt practices was in a most imperfect state, and greatly needed reform. With regard to the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich on the subject of the Indian Vernacular Press Law, he could not but think that the discussion would lead to a most imperfect and unsatisfactory result if it did not begin till 9 o'clock. He considered that it would be better for the dignity of the House, and for the power of the country in India that the discussion should receive ample treatment, which it could not do if it only began at 9 o'clock. Many hon. Members would be tempted to oppose the Motion now made unless some promise on the subject was given.

desired to know, when the Government proposed to go into Committee of Supply again on the Navy Estimates; and, whether the Government would adhere to the understanding that fair opportunity should be given for the discussion of those Estimates; because there were several very important matters which would come on for discussion at that time?

, referring to the Irish Fisheries Bill, of which he had charge, asked, what course the Government intended to take, after the House had in a former Session passed a Resolution acknowledging the necessity of dealing with the question?

said, he must join in the appeal which had been made to the Government to give to-morrow night for the discussion of the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich. On a former occasion the Government distinctly said that if the subject were not then pressed, they would recognize the importance of a full debate when the Papers were laid on the Table. Considering the importance of the Press Act in itself, the manner in which it had been passed, and also the manner in which the Home Government had had their hand forced by the Government of India, he thought it must be obvious that such issues as were involved could not be debated in a Sitting which began at 9 o'clock. He would make an earnest appeal to the Government to allow to-morrow evening to be taken for the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich.

agreed with the hon. Member for Hackney (Mr. Fawcett) as to the importance of the questions to which he had referred, but drew a different conclusion with regard to them. It would be far better that the discussion should not take place at all this Session. Whether a half, or the whole, of an evening were taken for the consideration of the subject, it would be an incomplete discussion.

said, that in the present state of Public Business, and considering the period of the Session at which they had arrived, it would be desirable that the Scotch Members should be informed which of the Bills relating to Scotland now before the House were likely to be passed in the course of this Session. He would therefore ask, which of those measures was it the intention of the Government to adhere to; which of them were the Government determined to carry through? If the Chancellor of the Exchequer was unable to answer those questions that evening, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would do so in the course of the present week.

wished to know, on what day the Army Estimates would be proceeded with, when the question of supplementing the Army Examination by physical competition could be discussed?

Sir, I am very much indebted to the House for the manner in which they have received the main proposition which I have submitted—namely, that the remaining Tuesdays and Wednesdays shall be given to the Government Business. I think it is for the convenience of the House, as well as for that of the Government, that that arrangement should now be made. We have had, as the noble Lord has truly said, a rather protracted Session, beginning so early as we did; and I think the time has quite come when we may endeavour to see our way towards the conclusion of the Business that lies before us. At the same time, I do not think that the day has yet actually arrived for that which is technically known as the Massacre of the Innocents. I think it would be unwise and indiscreet in us to throw over, at the present moment, a large number of Bills, some of which it might possibly be found in our power to pass; but I think it is quite reasonable that the House should ask what are the Bills we attach special importance to, and what are those we have every expectation, and hope, and intention, so far as we can, of carrying. Now, there are two Bills, certainly, which stand in the first rank. One is the Bill of which we are to move the second reading to-night—the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Bill. The other is the Cattle Bill, which stands for progress in Committee to-morrow. I think it is very desirable that we should lose no time in making such progress as we can with those two Bills. That brings me to the question which the noble Lord put with regard to the Business for to-morrow. When I was asked the other night by the hon. Member for Hackney (Mr. Fawcett), whether the Government would dispense with a Morning Sitting to-morrow, in order that the whole evening might be given to the discussion of the Motion of the right hon. Member for Greenwich, I pointed out that it was of importance that we should proceed with the Cattle Bill, and I objected to the alteration of our arrangements on that ground. I still think it would not be for the convenience of the House that we should put off the commencement of that Bill in Committee. But I would wish to make this proposal. I feel the force of the appeal which has been made—that ample time should be given to discuss a question of such interest as that which my right hon. Friend (Mr. Gladstone) proposes to raise. What I suggest would be this—I have already made a Motion that, after to-morrow, Orders of the Day should have precedence of Notices of Motion upon Tuesdays—that is, with a view of taking a Morning Sitting to- morrow and proceeding with the ordinary Notices in the evening. Now, if the House would be willing to allow us to begin to take Tuesdays, not after tomorrow, but on to-morrow, and to allow us to begin the Cattle Bill in Committee to-morrow, at an evening regular Sitting, I would then undertake in the following week—say, to-morrow week—to place that Tuesday at the disposal of my right hon. Friend for the discussion of the question which he desires to bring forward. If that arrangement were acceptable, I should be glad to fall in with it. If not, I should propose to make the Motion in the form in which it stands at present. In that case, the Order of the Day, which has already been made, for the House to meet at 2 o'clock, for the purpose of proceeding with the Cattle Bill, would stand. I think the House will see that, in making that proposal, I am anxions to accomplish two objects. One is to give a proper time for the discussion of the Cattle Bill, which must take more than one night, in Committee, and with which it is desirable to proceed when we take it up. The second object is to give ample opportunity for the discussion of the question of the Vernacular Press. [Mr. GLADSTONE assented.] I understand that that arrangement is accepted. Under these circumstances, I shall ask presently for leave to withdraw the present Motion, and propose to leave out the two words. "after to-morrow;" and I shall have to make a Motion to correct the form of the Order in which it has been made. With regard to the other Bills which we have before us, there are two or three which the Government hope to proceed with, and to carry through. We propose to proceed with the Scotch Education Bill, and the Scotch Endowed Schools and Hospitals Bill. Both of those Bills are in such a state that we think we may fairly expect to carry them this Session. Then there is the Highways Bill, which stands for Report, and has yet to go to the House of Lords. I have no doubt we shall proceed with that measure. With reference to the County Government Bill, as the noble Lord has pointed out, it has been understood for me time that we have practically abandoned the hope of being able to proceed with that measure this Session. I will say nothing at this moment about the Valuation Bill. It would be pre- mature to say what we should be able to do with that measure; but we must proceed with the Highway Bill first. There are some Bills of smaller dimensions, but still of importance; and, considering the progress they have made, I think we ought to expect to proceed with them. There is, for instance, the Bishoprics Bill, which has made certain progress. There is the Territorial Waters Bill, which, having reference to its important and international character, certainly ought to be carried. Then there are the Admiralty and War Office Bill, the In-closure Bill, and some others which I hope we shall be able to proceed with. We do not intend to proceed this Session with the Under Secretaries of State (Scotland) Bill, or the Law Clerk (Scotland) Bill. With regard to the Criminal Code, that has already been explained. With regard to the Medical Law Amendment Bill, it would be premature to make any statement upon the subject; and I should prefer to take a little time before deciding what course the Government would adopt with regard to that measure. As to the Irish Bills, there is, of course, the important Bill now before us—the Intermediate Education Bill—and, possibly, we may be able to pass the Statute Law Revision Bill. I do not think we shall be able to pass the Bankruptcy Bill. With regard to one or two other Bills, it would not be possible at this time to give any definite answer. The hon. Member for Roscommon (the O'Conor Don) and others have called attention to that very interesting measure, the Sunday Closing Bill. I could not undertake to fix a day for it; but I think the House will feel that, after the length of time which has been spent in considering it, and the stage at which it has arrived, it would hardly be rational that the House should not proceed with it. I hope that an opportunity of doing so may arise. My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst) has referred to the Navy Estimates. I am, of course, anxious to get on with them and other Estimates; but I am bound to say that the Estimates which at present press most on us are the Education Estimates; and I hope we shall be able to proceed with them on Thursday next. So far as I can calculate at present, without knowing what contingencies may arise, I think we may look to take the Navy Estimates about Tuesday, the 30th, if we are ready to take the Indian Budget on Monday, the 29th; but without knowing what debates on important questions either of general or of foreign policy, it is almost premature to attempt to fix precisely the days on which these matters can be brought forward. I have endeavoured to give, as far as I can, general information to the House of the position in which we stand. I admit that there is some ground of complaint as to the Corrupt Practices Bill not having been introduced. I am afraid that at this period of the Session we can hardly hope to pass that Bill; but I think I can promise, at all events, that we will make every exertion to lay it on the Table before the end of the Session. Under these circumstances I beg to withdraw the Motion which I have made, and to substitute for it one with the words "after to-morrow" omitted. Then I shall move, with regard to to-morrow, that the Orders of the Day which are appointed for to-morrow at 2 o'clock be deferred until to-morrow.

in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that, fortunately, it was not necessary for him to detain the House at any length on the reasons which made it important that a measure on that subject should be introduced. He thought it was conceded on all sides that legislation in regard to Intermediate Education in Ireland called for early attention at the hands of the Government. He had hoped that he would have been able, at an earlier period of the Session, to move the second reading of the Bill; but circumstances, to which he need not specifically refer, but which were certainly beyond the control of himself and his Colleagues, had, unfortunately, rendered that impracticable. In ordinary circumstances, he would not have thought that an explanation, still less an apology, was due in respect of the introduction of the measure in "another place," where, he believed, it would be an advantage that more measures should be initiated; but an assurance having been given in this House, that the measure would be introduced on an early day, it was necessary to remind hon. Members that circumstances beyond the immediate control of the Government rendered it necessary to adopt the course which had resulted in the great advantage of the Bill being, in the first instance, explained to Parliament by his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, who, in addition to the many qualifications superior to his (Mr. Lowther's) own which he possessed, added thereto a long and intimate acquaintance with every aspect of that great question. The object in view was to place within the reach of all sects and creeds in Ireland facilities for obtaining Intermediate Education. No doubt, other schemes might have been devised. It might have been feasible to establish new schools with resources supplied from the State, or to subsidize existing institutions; but, for reasons which he thought would commend themselves to both sides of the House, the Government did not think it desirable to adopt either of these courses. If they had done so, they would have been treading on very dangerous ground, even if either course had offered a desirable method of effecting the object in view. They, therefore, selected the alternative plan, which was embodied in the Bill—that of placing within the reach of all, impartially and without distinction of sect or religion, advantages which it was hoped the nation at large would avail itself of. It was proposed to constitute a Board, to be called an Intermediate Education Board for Ireland—and if, in detailing the various points of the Bill, he travelled over ground already familiar to hon. Gentlemen, he must plead as an excuse that it was the usual course to explain the provisions of a Bill to both Houses of Parliament. This Board would consist of seven Members, of whom three would form a quorum. The composition of the Board was a matter upon which he could imagine that differences of opinion would prevail. Some would prefer a small Board of paid members; others a Board of which some members should be paid; but it was thought by the Government there were fewer objections to the plan of having the members entirely unpaid. It was proposed that they should be aided by Assistant Commissioners at £1,000 a-year, to act also as Secretaries and Inspectors. Under the scheme, the inspection was not likely to be arduous; but it might be necessary for the Board periodically to make itself acquainted with circumstances which would require investigation on the spot, and therefore, instead of appointing Inspectors to discharge this duty, it was thought better to combine the duties of Inspectors with the more regular duties of the Assistant Commissioners. The other officers necessary to carrying on the operations of the Board would be appointed by it; those he had named as well as the Board being appointed by the Lord Lieutenant. To the Board it was proposed to confide the distribution of the income received from £1,000,000 of the accumulated surplus revenue of the Irish Church; it would be administered on the responsibility of the Board under the conditions to be found in the Bill, involving due scrutiny and publication of accounts. The duties of the Board were explained in Clauses 4 and 5 of the Bill, and those duties would be to institute and carry on a system of public examinations of students. Without wearying the House by recapitulating the sub-sections of the Bill, he would just explain how it was proposed to deal with the proposals so far as exhibitions were concerned, and these points would be found detailed in the Schedule. It was proposed to deal with the students who complied with the conditions laid down, without any inquiry as to how or where they acquired their education. It was proposed that the prizes found in the Schedule should be open to all comers, without a question as to the mode in which they attained the knowledge necessary to obtain the prizes. The Board would appoint exa- miners, whose names would be published at the stated time, and these examiners would hold examinations at different centres, selected according to their convenience at the discretion of the Board. These examinations, though held in the various localities appointed for the purpose and the convenience of pupils, would not be considered local examinations as far as results were concerned; but every pupil who competed at the various centres would be considered for the purposes of examination to have competed at one, and the prizes distributed accordingly. The subjects upon which examination would be held were detailed in the first part of the Schedule. They were—(1), ancient languages and literature, and history of Greece and Rome; (2), English language, literature, and history;(3), the French, German, and Italian languages, literature, and history; (4), mathematics, including arithmetic and book-keeping; (5), natural science; (6), and other subjects of secular education selected by the Board from time to time. At this stage, he would call attention to the fact that it was proposed to deal solely with secular subjects; the scheme did not in any way deal with religious subjects. The pupils would be restricted to certain ages, and the examination held over a course of three years. The ages had been fixed so as to in no way interfere with early elementary education or University education, and he felt sure would meet the approval of the House. These ages were 16, 17, and 18, and the pupils would be required to give notice of their intention to apply for examination, and the Bill could require the payment of a fee not exceeding 10s. This last proviso had in some quarters been the subject of comment, and it might be well to call attention to the fact of the provision being for a fee not exceeding 10s., and the Board might, if it saw fit, charge a fee much lower than the maximum; but it must be generally admitted that some deposit was necessary, otherwise the examiners might be subjected to practical jokes, and those who had had experience of University examinations would be aware that this was not altogether an imaginary danger. In the first year the prizes within reach of the competitors were to be not less than £20, and in the second year not more than £30; the £20 being tenable for three years, and the £30 for two. No pupil was to hold two prizes or exhibitions simultaneously, nor to combine one of these with any other. Of course, it would be open to any pupil having obtained two prizes to elect which he would retain. One of the conditions attached to the retention of an exhibition was that the pupil must, the year following that in which he had obtained the prize, pass an examination in at least three subjects, the object of this being to prevent any pupil obtaining a prize by a mere system of cramming, and then abandoning his studies. In addition to the three subjects, he would be required to obtain a certificate of merit in at least one. The prizes for the third year were fixed at a sum not exceeding £50. He thought he had, as briefly as he could, drawn attention to the main provisions of the Bill so far as it affected exhibitions and prizes for students, and he should like to say a word or two with regard to the distinct question of result fees. It would be seen with regard to result fees, which they proposed, that they were to be paid to the managers of schools whose pupils were educated in the manner detailed in the Schedule. It had been pointed out that the term "manager of schools" had been used instead of master. They proposed to pay the money to the person responsible for the management of the schools, whether he were the board manager or the individual master, provided the master was himself manager of the school. The word manager was used for this reason—there was no intention to pay sums of money to a particular teacher to whom the instruction might be due. With regard to exhibitions, they would be open to all comers, and no questions would be asked. They would ask no questions as to religion or how the education had been obtained, or as to anything of that kind. They would not ask whether the applicant had over been to school even. If a boy had been self-educated, or educated by a parent or tutor, the exhibitions would be thrown open all the same. If a boy derived his knowledge from intuition, it was equally unimportant to them—they only asked that he should comply with the examination. With regard to the result fees, the case was, of course, entirely different. They would require to make the result fees in strict conformity with conditions which should be satisfactory to the Board and Parliament. Among those conditions would be found Clause 7 of the Bill. This was what was called a Conscience Clause, and he had heard it suggested that that clause might be omitted from the Bill. He did not share that opinion. It had long been the established practice to insist upon the presence in any scheme dealing with education supported from funds of a public character of a clause of this nature. The clause had been drawn in a manner which made it free from any valid objection. He thought it would be generally admitted that this clause gave adequate protection to any pupil who desired secular instruction without interfering with religious instruction. The House would observe that the Bill defined what was called a school, and this definition was introduced to prevent this scheme being made use of by those who simply made use of it for the advantage of a system of cramming. A school then was held to mean any educational institution, not being a National School, to which the pupil had made 100 attendances within a certain specified time—about nine months. The object of this was to provide a guarantee that an institution which obtained a share of the public money should be a bonâ fide school, and the conditions to this Proviso were not unnecessarily stringent. They had excluded National School teachers from result fees. The object of this was that these National Schools having relegated to them the duty of imparting primary education, they thought that it would be placing a temptation in the way of the managers of these schools if they were induced to devote the time of their teachers to any considerable extent to a limited number of pupils who might show a greater capacity and promise than others; and that the tendency under the scheme would be that the main functions of the National Schools would run considerable risk of neglect. He thanked the House for the attention with which he had been listened to, in giving what must have been to a great extent a repetition of matter which was tolerably well known to many hon. Gentlemen; and he would merely, in conclusion, call attention to the position in which the question now stood. The fact that Parliament had been in Session already for six months would suggest that unless this Bill received, as he hoped it would receive, general concurrence, it could not pass this Session; and if the Government had not felt that the Bill would receive this general concurrence, they would not have felt it to be their duty to submit it to the House of Commons. The time which was now at their disposal was very limited, and while they did not shrink from a full examination of every clause and line in the Bill, he would remind the House that, unless the criticism of the Bill was brought within reasonable limits, the chances of passing it would be seriously jeopardized. He anticipated that Gentlemen who took part in the discussion of the Bill would do so with the view of expediting its passage through the House. He trusted that no extraneous topics would be introduced, and that such questions as Women's Rights or the constitution of Endowed Schools, or the extension of the system proposed in the Bill, would be relegated to a probably not very distant future. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill.

in moving that the Bill be read a second time that day three months, said, there could be no doubt there was something remarkable, and indeed extraordinary, in the conduct of the Government with regard to this Bill. It was one of the few Bills mentioned in the Queen's Speech. It was a measure which had been heralded by discussions and investigations; it was simple in its construction, and not complicated in its details; it must have been framed some time ago; it was a measure in which the various religious parties in Ireland were deeply interested; and, notwithstanding all that, the Government kept the Bill in the drawer until five months of the Session had elapsed. They were now asked, under the pressure of a desire to obtain the Queen's College Estimates, to hurry this measure not only through the stage of second reading, but through the stage of Committee, without there having been any actual discussion of its merits. It was most remarkable that while, when the measure was introduced "elsewhere," there was a foreshadowing of a discussion on the second reading and indications that serious Amendments would be moved in Committee, so far from the Bill receiving anything like a critical discussion, it passed through Committee without so much as the alteration of a word. He ventured to say that at that moment the real nature, scope, object, and result of the measure were wholly unknown throughout Ireland. He maintained that the measure constituted the commencement of a course of proceeding which was practically a reversal of the conduct of Parliament during the last 50 years, and meant nothing more nor less than the inauguration of a system which must end in concurrent endowment of education throughout Ireland. The result of the Bill must be to endow schools which were now exclusively sectarian, which were likely to continue sectarian, and which were not only likely to continue sectarian, but to be made more intensely sectarian by the operation of its provisions. They had been told that the measure had been received with almost universal approbation—a fact which in itself tended to excite suspicion. The circumstance that by a measure of this sort a Conservative Government were able to propitiate a class of opponents who were not usually very easy of propitiation was somewhat strange; but he believed there was a desire and tendency by the Bill to make matters pleasant all round. He thought, too, that the remarkable concurrence of sentiment among the Roman Catholic Representatives in respect of the Bill was to be attributed not only to the enactments which were to be found in the measure itself, but also to what must necessarily follow in consequence of it. The Bill had, indeed, been received with a suppressed enthusiasm by the Roman Catholic Party—an enthusiasm which had been prudently suppressed; it had been received with a gratitude which was strongly tinged and flavoured with an expectation of further favours yet to be conferred. The Bill proceeded upon what had been described as the present condition of Intermediate Education in Ireland—defective in quality and inadequate in quantity. But a word ought to be said on behalf of the intermediate schools in Ireland which had done such good service to the State. It was not correct to describe the quality of the Intermediate Education given in the middle-class schools in Ireland as deplorable. When he spoke of Foyle College in Londonderry, of the Academic Institute in Derry, of the Royal Schools of Raphoe and Armagh—which institutions he knew and valued—he denied that they were, in any respect, unfit competitors with similar institutions in England or Scotland. The real want, so far as Intermediate Education in Ireland was concerned, was one which the Bill could not by any possibility supply—namely, the number of schools available for the middle classes. It had been shown that the number of such schools had been gradually diminishing in Ireland; there were now only about 500 such schools, and what was the inducement held out by the Bill to increase the number? It proposed to set aside a sum which would at most produce £35,000 a-year. That sum would be divided into three parts—expenses of management, prizes and exhibitions, and next the satisfaction of the results branch. They started with two paid Commissioners, a staff of examiners, and all the expenses of the office. These items, he thought, would absorb £10,000 a-year. The remaining £25,000 a-year was the sum, the appropriation of which was to furnish the stimulus required to put Intermediate Education in Ireland on its proper basis. But the £25,000 a-year should be divided into two parts. The prizes would, of course, go to the scholars—the result fees formed the inducement for the establishment of new schools, and he calculated that they would probably amount to £10,000 a-year, a sum which would represent 2,000 scholars, an average of £5 for each scholar. What inducement would that be to any man to start a new school? To give anything approaching a substantial result the proprietor should be entitled to count on at least £100 a-year from results fees. For this sum he should have about 30 successful pupils, and to secure that number he would require to have about 120 scholars. Well, further, in a Bill like the present, he should expect to find a provision in reference to loans for building new schools; but the measure was entirely silent on that subject. Then, again, examinations were to be held in various parts of the country. Many parents were wholly unable to bear the expense of sending their children long distances, and he thought the House might reasonably expect to find some provision for the assistance of poor scholars to enable them to travel to distant towns for the purpose of being examined. He had spoken of what the Bill did not do. Now he would refer to what it would accomplish. It would not, he thought, be disputed that the intermediate schools in Ireland were, as between the two classes, Protestants and Roman Catholics, practically and substantially denominational. He had made inquiry with reference to one or two schools, and he found that in each case there was only one Roman Catholic attending the school as a day scholar. It did not detract from the state of things with which they had to deal that all the existing intermediate schools were practically denominational, and in the most severe sense of the term. In one school all the children were Roman Catholics and in the other all Protestants. While he thought this Bill a step in the direction of concurrent endowment, he admitted that it must have that effect in boarding schools, because there was no obligation on the managers of such schools to accept day scholars; and, therefore, the question arose whether the Bill would have the effect of diminishing the sectarian character of the schools generally? This question he commended to the consideration of the House. It was proposed in the Bill that the results fees payable to the managers of the schools should be drawn from public funds; but there was no provision for inspection of the schools, and as far as he knew, such a provision had always been included in English and Scotch Acts dealing with education by subsidies out of public money. No public grants ought to be made to schools except the Government Department of Education had an opportunity of deciding for themselves whether the system was satisfactory, alike as to the quality of the education afforded and the preservation of respect for the religious susceptibilities of the children educated and of their parents. He might be told in reference to this to look at the Conscience Clause contained in the Bill. He had looked at it; and he asked himself who was the father and who was the mother of it. He could not find that it was framed on the Conscience Clause of any of the other educational measures which had been brought before Parliament. Under it there was not, as under the other Conscience Clauses, provision made for specific hours of the day in which secular education alone should be given. Still less was there anything requiring managers of schools to receive as students all the pupils who might be presented to them. There was nothing in the Bill which would prevent the managers of any boarding school, desirous of closing their doors against the members of a denomination different from that of the majority of their scholars, saying—"We will take no day scholars." There was nothing which would enable a man to say to those managers—"You are receiving Government pay; you are bound to receive these scholars; do the best you can with them—but do not interfere with their religious belief." That being so, what was the object of the particular clause in the Bill referring to this matter? The object was manifest, it was to endow all and sundry—Roman Catholic schools, Episcopalian schools, and Presbyterian schools. This was the way in which the Conscience Clause would be avoided. It would be avoided by boarding schools saying that they did not take any day scholars, and it would be avoided by day schools excluding any scholars whose presence would be unacceptable. In this Bill there was nothing which required any given number of hours per day to be devoted to purely secular instruction. No provision was to be found in it such as was to be found in other Acts where the Conscience Clause was protected by a system of Government inspection. There was, therefore, in the Bill a Conscience Clause so weak in its character, so ineffectual in its operation, not possessing even the protection of Government inspection—such as was provided for schools where a much more powerful Conscience Clause was provided—that he conceived himself justified in thinking that the Bill meant a great deal more than it said, that it was the commencement of a reversal of that system of legislation which had prevailed in this House for 50 years, at all events, with reference to education—namely, the system of endeavouring to bring all the scholars of the various denominations into one school, and not to separate them into several schools. After the Queen's College had been established, after Trinity College had been opened, after the Irish Church had been disestablished, they were now to commence a totally different system. There were no provisions in the Bill as to the particular subjects of examination. There was no provision requiring any general test as to the efficiency of schools the managers of which were to receive results fees. He would, therefore, ask whether an immediate effect of this Bill would not be to encourage the process, on the part of managers of schools, of cramming three or four promising boys, it might be, in their schools, to the detriment of others, as the managers had the opportunity of selecting any three of the subjects in which the boys were to pass? He came to the real turning-point of the Bill. Who were to be the Commissioners? He had put a Question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would give the House the names of the Commissioners before or while the House was in Committee on this Bill? These Commissioners were entitled to make regulations as to the examination of students and the appointment of examiners; they were to prescribe the powers and duties of those examiners; they were to define the qualifications of the students, also the subjects and nature of the examination; the fixing of the system of payments for results in the Schedule of the Bill; and, above all, they were to be the parties who were to be satisfied with the due observance of the Conscience Clause such as it was. It was, therefore, that Board which constituted the turning-point of this most important measure. What had been the sad experience of similar Boards in Ireland? The action of one of those Boards was perfectly well known in the House and throughout the country. They had heard something of the O'Keefe case, and something of other cases which had shown that the National Education Board in Ireland did not give as much hope as to another Board of Education to be formed on the same line. Was this Board to be equally divided between the two great religious divisions in Ireland—the Roman Catholic and the Protestant—with a casting vote to be given to somebody? Were they to have superannuated Judges as members of that Board? Were they to have religious bigots? Were the Commissioners to be exclusively ecclesiastics, or partly ecclesiastics and partly laymen? Were they to have men of independent thought, high literary culture, liberal ideas—men who had devoted themselves in time past to education, and who were likely to know something of the wants of the country? He had been greatly surprised, and he deeply regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had told the House that Her Majesty's Government did not intend to give them any information as to who were to be the Commissioners. He would not, of course, be content with that answer.

said, the hon. Member must have misunderstood him. What he had stated was, that he would not be prepared to name the Commissioners before the next stage of the Bill.

humbly apologized for having misunderstood the right hon. Gentleman; but the mistake had brought out in a more prominent way what had only been a negative answer. He did not believe the difficulty of the education question in Ireland could be dealt with unless the head of the proposed Board was made a responsible Minister in Parliament. He had no doubt the House would be told by the Treasury Bench that these Commissioners would be bound by the 5th clause, which required the rules made by the Commissioners under this Bill to be laid before Parliament and declared that they should be subject to be set aside within 40 days after the meeting of Parliament. But there were many difficulties in the way of private Members; and besides, these were days of obstruction, and there were Members in that House quite equal to the wasting of 40 days in a Session. Moreover, the provision as to setting aside, within 40 days after the meeting of Parliament, would not be worth a pin's head against the Government of the day, who could contrive to prevent a private Member having an opportunity of bringing forward a Motion to set aside the rules. Coming next to the funds which were to be used, he found that the right hon. Member for Greenwich, in his speech introducing the Bill disestablishing the Irish Church, set aside as inad- visable and improper the appropriation of the surplus funds of that Church to Irish education, on the ground that such an appropriation would be likely to lead to that sectarian bitterness which it was one of his great objects in introducing that measure to remove. But the Conservative Government, who were then loud in the cry against altering the Act of Union, were at least parties to the Act of 1869, and assented to a clause introduced into the Bill for the very purpose of preventing the surplus being applied to education. The 68th clause of the Disestablishment Act of 1869 provided that the surplus derivable from the disendowment of the Irish Church should be mainly applied to the relief of unavoidable calamity and suffering. He quite admitted that the clause said "mainly" applied; but it was a most remarkable and deplorable thing that the first Government which should propose to alter the clause should be a Conservative Government, and that they should alter it by making things pleasant all round, and introducing a system of concurrent endowment, which the House had resisted perseveringly for many years. The destiny of the surplus, under the 68th clause, was a destiny connected with the very poorest. But this Bill, and that introduced by the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt) last year, seeking to appropriate £400,000 for the purpose of establishing a Roman Catholic University, proposed an appropriation for the poorest in order to give it to the middle class. Thus, the Legislature was called upon to depart from the policy which it asserted when the Irish Church Act was passed. He next came to the question, what would this Bill lead to? He thought he would not be making a wrong guess, if he said that it was a mere pilot fish put forward by the Government previous to the introduction of a new Bill endowing a Roman Catholic University. Some expressions had fallen from a noble Lord in "another place" which strongly tended to this conclusion. The very convenient £3,000,000 or £4,000,000 of surplus which was to be found in the spoils of the disestablished Irish Church would be very soon appealed to for the purpose of supporting a more direct denominational measure than this. Was he wrong in assuming that there was some reason for the wondrous unanimity among the Roman Catholic Members of the House? ["Hear, hear!"] He accepted that cheer as an acknowledgment that this was the first concession they had received, and that it was received by them as a direct endowment of their own class. ["No, no!"] Well, as there were two answers, they would see, in the course of the debate, which was the right one; but he thought the first would turn out to be the truth. He thought the House had become supine on the subject of mixed education. What had happened the other night? The hon. Member for Roscommon (the O'Conor Don) brought forward his Motion for extending University Education in Ireland, and who did they find voting for it? Fifteen or 20 of the most extreme English Liberals, among whom were his hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham (Mr. Chamberlain), and his hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands). When he found those hon. Gentlemen voting for a Motion having for its object the State support of denominational education in Ireland, and brought forward by those whose views were unmistakable, he should like to hear those English Liberals state what their policy was. If they could swallow that Motion, they could also swallow this Bill. He was utterly careless about the division on that occasion; he knew that he would be in a miserable minority; but he wanted the House and the country to act with the full consciousness that the Bill was really the commencement of concurrent endowment. He held in his hand a document, issued within the last few days by the Catholic Union in Ireland, which stated that the success of that measure depended on the constitution of the Board, and that Commissioners and other officers should be selected having the confidence of the Catholic people of Ireland, which, of course, he thought only reasonable. The Manifesto went on to say, that certain steps must be preliminary to what they were all anxious to consider—namely, the question of University education; and that they hoped that early next Session a Bill would be introduced to remedy the grievance under which the Roman Catholics laboured. Was he wrong in saying that this Bill was looked upon by those who would be the chief recipients as the precursor of a measure of a still more serious character? It was impossible to sever this question of Intermediate Education from that of University, or that of primary education. They must all stand or fall together. The Bill was a direct encouragement to the whole Roman Catholic Hierarchy to commence again that attack on the system of primary education in Ireland which they had been pursuing for years, and also to continue their hostility against the Queen's Colleges which they had carried on so unceasingly. The cause of united mixed education was identified with freedom of thought, liberal education, social unity, order, and loyalty. People in England could not well understand the importance in Ireland of keeping in the same school boys who might, if educated separately, be taught to regard each other as enemies by those whom they considered their religious teachers. The cause of united mixed education was, therefore, a sacred cause. It was because he believed this was the commencement of a course which would be downward and perilous in itself, both to the Ministry that commenced it, and to the cause of education in Ireland, that he opposed the Bill, and moved that it be read a second time that day three months.

seconded the Amendment.

I shall not attempt to enter into that portion of the speech of the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) in which he expressed his estimate and suspicion of the future intentions of the Government, in respect to education in Ireland. It will be for them to say, so far as they may think necessary, whether this measure is introduced by them as a prelude to other and greater changes, and in particular to the direct adoption of denominational education as a subject of public favour and public grants in the higher Irish education with which the Universities are connected. It is enough, I think, for us to look at this Bill as it is in itself, and I am not disposed to lose any time in stating that I, for one, am very much disposed to give it a cordial support. The principle of the Bill, it appears to me, does not menace anything that has heretofore been done by Parliament in the sense of promoting mixed or united education. It aims at supplying a want and filling a vacuum now existing in Ireland, which it is desirable to fill and supply. My belief is we may proceed perfectly well upon the general lines of this Bill, so to deal with the question as not to raise any of those thorny subjects full of the painful recollections and jealous fears which the hon. Member, not unnaturally, with the views he holds, was led to introduce into his speech. I conceive the principle of this Bill to be, not the endowment of denominational education, not the establishment of concurrent endowment; but the adoption of this one practical proposition—as there is a deficiency in quantity, and likewise a deficiency in quality in Intermediate Education in Ireland, we will set about meeting that case in such a way and by such machinery as shall go most directly to its aim without entering, if it be possible to avoid them, on controverted questions—that is to say, we are about to proclaim to the youth of Ireland seeking Intermediate Education, largely including therein the preparatory stages of education, which is preparatory to the higher, that we will endeavour to give them assistance and encouragement in the prosecution of their work by applying a certain portion of the national funds, now available for the purpose, to the recognition of attainments which they shall achieve in secular education, asking no questions as to the place in which they were educated, as to the persons by whom they were educated, or as to the religious principles in connection with which that secular education was obtained. That is a principle perfectly equal as regards all persons and parties in Ireland. If in Ireland there is a preponderance of opinion in favour of mixed and united education in intermediate schools, those who entertain that sentiment will be under no disadvantage whatever, direct or indirect, by our adopting the principle of the present Bill. If, on the other hand, there be many in Ireland who prefer for their children a denominational education, then, undoubtedly, without receiving a farthing of public money for purposes purely denominational, they will be placed in this condition, that they will not be excluded from the advantages open to those who prefer a mixed education. I need not say in connection with antecedent circumstances that I could not consistently object to a Bill founded upon such a principle. For many years we have sought to establish and to act upon the proposition that no man ought, in consequence of the belief or opinion he may entertain as to the question between denominational and mixed education, to be debarred from the attainment of degrees in Universities or from other advantages which the State may think fit to offer. I certainly must make this concession in fairness and candour to the hon. Member who has just moved the rejection of the Bill. It is quite obvious that this principle may carry us beyond the present Bill. It may be that this measure is introductory to other measures applying a similar principle to University education. It may be that the Government intend—or, whether they intend it or not, it may happen in future—that Parliament, having passed this measure, may be asked in like manner to say that degrees shall be given to all persons in Ireland irrespective of the opinions they may hold, and irrespective of the practice they may think fit to adopt, in making their choice between mixed education on the one side, and denominational education on the other. It may likewise be said, in conformity with the principle of this measure that, so far as secular knowledge is concerned, we ought not to confine the principle to schools, but ought to extend it to Universities, giving encouragement wholly irrespective of questions relating to religion. At the same time, I do not conceive that any Gentleman sitting on either side of the House would fail to perceive that there is a broad and intelligible distinction between the adoption of that proposition and giving sanction to a measure which, whether it be right or wrong, is not such a measure as the hon. Member opposite apprehends, giving direct endowment to religion in connection with University or school teaching. I do not feel, therefore, so far as I am concerned, seeing that I have never given direct or indirect support to the endowment of a Roman Catholic University, that I am involved by assenting to the principle of this Bill in any inconvenient consequences in assenting to University education in Ireland; while, at the same time, I can conceive that a large part of the practical grievance which I believe to exist in Ireland on the subject of University education in Ireland as it did exist six or eight years ago, when we endeavoured to remove it, may be removed by acting upon the principle of this Bill. Well, then, Sir, the principle seems to be in conformity with that for which we have long contended—that no man, on account of his religious opinions or preferences, is as to education to be placed in a position of disadvantage as respects secular knowledge or any of the honours and rewards which may be assigned to a secular knowledge by the wisdom of Parliament. Then I come to the question as to the source from which are to be derived the funds by which the Government propose to work this measure. But I would venture to say to the hon. Member who has just sat down that I think there is something in the apprehension he expresses as to the fears which may possibly be aroused with respect to the subject of concurrent endowment, and which it is desirable to avoid awakening; but I may endeavour to point out how all apprehensions of that kind may be avoided. What is the source whence this money is to be drawn? It is perfectly true that in introducing the Bill to disestablish the Irish Church in 1869, I disavowed, on the part of the Government of that day, all idea of applying the funds derivable from that source, or any portion of those funds to education. The hon. Gentleman has correctly stated that, according to the deliberate judgment of Parliament, the funds are mainly to be devoted to other purposes. I admit it is something of an anomaly when there is a provision in an Act of Parliament which we do not propose to alter that the funds shall go mainly to another set purpose and not to education. There is, perhaps, something of solecism in proposing to appropriate out of the surplus of the revenues of the Irish Church £1,000,000 for the purpose of Irish education. At the same time, I do not attach a capital weight or importance to that consideration. When we set aside the purposes of education for the disposal of the sur- plus, it was not on account of any intrinsic impropriety in any such application; it was, on the contrary, entirely upon grounds which were of a special and partial character. One of them was this—we thought if we were to apply to education in Ireland the surplus revenues of the Irish Church, it would excite apprehension on the part of the Irish Members that their country was not to obtain its due share of public grants for primary purposes from the Consolidated Fund; and we entertained a fear that if we were to attempt anything of the sort the religious jealousy and difficulties which would be imported into the discussion would render it very difficult, if not altogether impossible, for us to attain our ends. I believe this opinion had great influence at the time, and that if we had made a proposal of such a nature as that which is now before the House, we should not have been so happy in keeping the subject apart from those religious jealousies and difficulties as I trust the Government may be, and heretofore have been. This is not the first time that such things have happened. It was Sir Robert Peel, with a Conservative Government, who endowed the College of Maynooth? But why was it that it was a Conservative Government that endowed the College of Maynooth? It was because, undoubtedly, if the same thing had been attempted by a Liberal Government, the endowment never would have been permitted by the Conservative Party. I believe we are now in exactly the same condition, and that the Government are proposing measures agreeable to our principles, and which, I hope, will have our support—measures which, if they were proposed by the Liberal Party, would be destined to a less amicable reception and a more stormy passage through the various stages of their Parliamentary progress than this Bill is likely to experience. I, therefore, not perceiving that education is in itself an improper subject for the application of this money, am perfectly prepared to give due weight to the authority of the Government as to the source from which they propose to draw the funds; and I am also prepared to give great weight indeed to the Irish sentiment on the question. I apprehend that, apart from all controversies as to Irish ideas, the disposal of this surplus is certainly a question in which Irish ideas ought to have a very large influence. I, therefore, make no difficulty about the subject of the deviation from the spirit—if there be a deviation, and I do not care to inquire how much deviation there be—of the 68th clause of the Irish Church Act. I make no difficulty as to accepting the principle on which this Bill is proposed. When I pass from the principle of the measure to the details, I will make a suggestion for the consideration of Her Majesty's Government which, although it may appear to make a considerable alteration in the form of the Bill, is not only offered in good faith in reference to the purposes of the Bill, but likewise is recommended because it would greatly improve the construction of the Bill with regard to the attainment of the objects in view. The hon. Member who has just sat down draws a formidable image of concurrent endowment, a subject in which I cordially hope Parliament may never find itself involved. If ever there was a time for concurrent endowment, that time has altogether passed by. The substance of that proposal in Ireland, I trust, may never come before us; and, as to the other idea and image of that proposal, I feel it to be accompanied by so many dangers and disagreeable results that I would, if possible, avoid any appearance of whatever could be represented as belonging to that particular subject. The hon. Member says very great difficulty and jealousy attended the appointment of Commissioners. These difficulties and jealousies will be not political, but religious difficulties. The same thing appears to emerge with reference to the appointment of Secretaries. It is proposed that there should be a Secretary representing the Roman Catholics, a Secretary representing the Presbyterians, and a Secretary representing the members of the Disestablished Church. I would gladly get rid of all these distinctions, and I think it would be wise, if possible, to shape the Bill as soon as possible so as to dismiss those ideas from our minds. Again, it is pointed out that by the fees that are to be given for results, the recipients of these fees will, in a certain sense, assume the character of public officers and public functionaries; and it is upon that fact that the hon. Member apparently founds himself when he says he sees in this Bill almost the principle of concurrent endowment. It appears well worth the while of the Government to consider whether there is any value at all in that provision of the Bill which provides for the payment of fees to the managers of schools, and whether the money which they propose to give would not go far more directly to its purpose, and would not steer far clearer of all denominational and religious difficulties, if they were to bestow the whole of it, instead of part, upon exhibitions and prizes which would go straight to the young men. It may be said that it is necessary that something should go to the teachers. In that I entirely agree. But the way for its reaching the teachers is prepared through the pupils. If you make it worth the while of the pupils to seek for instruction, they will make it worth the while of the teacher to give to them the instruction. Now, under this Bill as it stands, I take the strongest case—the case of Maynooth. I apprehend it is perfectly clear that pupils at Maynooth might appear as candidates for exhibitions and prizes. There is, in the limitation of 18 years, a clause which will admit Maynooth; for Maynooth, as I understand, is divided into two departments perfectly distinct from one another. As regards the junior department, unquestionably the young men would be competent in respect of their secular knowledge to compete for exhibitions and prizes under this Bill. If they can, I think it quite proper that they should, and I think their competing would tend to improve the spirit and energy of Maynooth without inflicting injury of any sort. But I am not by any means sure that the teachers might not qualify to receive fees under the second provision of this Bill, which grants to the managers of schools certain payments. I do not say that it would be necessarily harmful in itself, but that it would be an arrangement tending to create great jealousy; and, unless it be necessary for the purpose of education, that is a feeling which we ought to be desirous of avoiding. In the same way much has been said about the Conscience Clause. There is in some quarters a great desire to get quit of Conscience Clauses. On the other hand, the hon. Member says—"Strengthen the Conscience Clause and make it more stringent. Carry it further into the details of the schools." If that is done, it is very possible that a rather serious issue may be joined now or hereafter upon some question of that clause. But then the Conscience Clause arises entirely out of that provision of the Bill to which I have referred. If you are content to give your exhibitions and prizes to young men, asking no questions at all except as to their competency, you get rid of the whole difficulty as to the Conscience Clause—it has no place in the Bill, except in reference to the schools in which the managers are to be entitled to receive fees. The hon. Member anticipates that a very formidable portion of the £35,000 a-year which he estimates as the proceeds of the £1,000,000 will be absorbed in expenses. Undoubtedly, the more you simplify the Bill the less will be the expenditure under the Bill, and the less will be the amount of the deductions from the amount which will go direct to the pupils. If you are to have a double set of machinery at work—one for examinations with a view to exhibitions and prizes, and the other in the schools for the purpose of granting to the managers of schools fees upon the results achieved—it is evident that your machinery will be operose to a certain extent. If you throw the whole force into granting exhibitions and prizes, you will have only one set of machinery for conducting the work. One part of the scheme, as I understand it, is that you will have an agency circulating about the country, examining school by school to ascertain where to award a small sum in respect of the pupils. You would, therefore, have a large net sum out of the £35,000 to devote to the purposes of the Bill if you simplify it by excluding the fees to managers and found exhibitions and prizes for pupils. I throw out these suggestions with a desire that this Bill should be, if possible, free from serious difficulties. If you found these exhibitions and prizes it will be impossible for any degree of jealousy to lead any party to impute to you those further schemes of intention so formidable to the mind of the hon. Member. There will be opportunities hereafter of entering into details. It appears to me that in simplifying the measure in that way a great good will be effected in more ways than one. There are just two other points on which I would venture to say a word. There is a great anxiety in Ireland that the benefits of this measure should be extended to young women as well as to young men. It appears to me that is a most reasonable anxiety. We have, upon the whole, done rather less than justice to women as compared with men. There is something, too, in reference to the source from which this money is to come which ought not to be lost sight of. It is to come from purposes of direct religious endowment now gone. Unquestionably, when it was applied to the purposes of direct religious endowment, that portion of creation profited by it at least as largely as that to which we ourselves belong. That may be a secondary consideration; but, upon the grounds of general justice and policy, at a time when women themselves, quite irrespective of public aid, are making such great efforts for their own advancement, and when so just a feeling has arisen and is shared by those who stop short of supporting their political enfranchisement that they receive less than their due, I am most anxious to press upon Her Majesty's Government that they should make no scruple or difficulty as to admitting them in the fullest manner to share in the advantage of the Bill. The simplification of the form of the measure which I have ventured to recommend would likewise render it more easy to attain that object. The other suggestion I wish to make is this—that, as the proposed plan is an experimental one, and as the State machinery of education in Ireland has become rather inconveniently complex between the Queen's University, the National Board, and the new Board now to be created, I think it is desirable that we should be entangled as little as possible with the consideration of the vested interests of the persons who will be engaged in working out the new system. I therefore submit for the consideration of the Government whether it would not be well that, when the appointments to paid offices are made, they should be for a term of years, and not for life, so as to facilitate any future re-construction or consolidation which might, as the result of a larger experience, be found desirable? I hope I have said nothing to belie that which I stated at the outset with regard to my sincere anxiety to promote the passage of the Bill. Sir, I am heartily glad that the Bill has been introduced. No doubt it would be far better if it could have been brought in at an earlier period of the Session; but we all know the difficulties with which every Government has to contend, and when we consider the enormous mass of Business to be transacted during the Session, it would not be fair to convert the fact into a subject of cavil. Setting this aside, then, and all secondary matters of detail in the structure of the Bill, I heartily hope that, even at this late period of the Session, it may pass as speedily as is consistent with its full consideration; because I think it is a new boon conferred upon the people of Ireland in conformity with justice and right, and one which will tend more and more to attach them to the laws and institutions of the Realm.

Sir, I feel grateful to the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis), because he has succeeded in provoking a discussion on the second reading of this Bill; for Bills of this importance ought not to be allowed to pass their second reading without debate. Such a proceeding does not always imply that the House is satisfied with the principle of the Bill; but rather, sometimes, that the House desires to ignore the dangers and difficulties that may be incidental to the adoption and enforcement of the principle of the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone) has paid a very singular compliment to the Conservative Party. For he said, that when he was a Member of the Conservative Party, the Bill for the Maynooth Grant was introduced and passed, because, if it had been proposed by the Liberal Party, it would certainly not have been adopted. The right hon. Gentleman, therefore, considers that the Conservative Party has been habitually and, he infers, necessarily must be untrue to its principles; and I confess that, as respects the latter part of this Bill, the Conservative Peers have shown themselves less true to their principles than the right hon. Gentleman has proved true to the remnant of his Conservative instinct, when he pointed out that the hon. Member for Londonderry was perfectly correct in his allegation, that if we should endow the managers of those schools, as proposed in these latter clauses, we should proceed on the principle of concurrent endowment. That was a candid and honest warning on the part of the right hon. Gentleman, and I do rejoice that there is still such a remnant of Constitutional feeling pervading the nature and instincts of the right hon. Gentleman, that he would not willingly endow the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in Ireland. The right hon. Gentleman now stands with the Liberal Party; and he knows that that Hierarchy, though they joined with and availed themselves of the assistance of the Liberal Party against the institutions of this country, are now ready and prepared to avail themselves of the assistance of the Conservative Party; in fact, they are indifferent to both Parties. The chief of their religion has declared himself and them to be the deadly enemies of Liberalism and of Freedom in all its forms. This is an ugly fact, which it has become the fashion to ignore. The time has passed when this fact can be overlooked. This House knows this Ultramontane power—knows that the power of this arbitrary system of Ultramontanism has made itself felt in the disorganization of this House itself. While so trampled in the dust have been the Protestants of Ireland—["No, no!"]—yes, I repeat, so trampled in the dust have been the Protestants of Ireland, that this is the first occasion on which a Representative of the Protestants of Ireland has ventured to enunciate the great principles of which they were formerly the recognized defenders. Those principles have always been treated as an offence to the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in Ireland. To crush the expression of the principles of Protestant freedom has always been the object of the Ultramontanes. I know it has been held disagreeable to recognize this fact, but there is a power in existence which we must resist if we would preserve freedom of intellect to Ireland; yet to do this is at once our duty and our interest as Protestants. I, for one, have never shrunk, at whatever personal cost, from a sincere, though it may have been a feeble adherence to and advocacy of the great principles of freedom, which are enshrined in the Protestant Constitution of this country. The operation of those principles is not an accident. Freedom is not an accident—it is a treasure that must be defended and preserved. Such has ever been my conviction, such the basis of my action. I seconded the Amendment of the hon. Member for Londonderry just now, because I have at last seen and heard him as the first among the Members of this House who ought to represent the Protestantism of Ireland, venturing to point out that by this Bill the House is likely to be launched upon a course which, if pursued unwarily, may crush freedom in Ireland as it was crushed in the Pontifical States, when under the domination of the late Pope; as it was crushed in Naples under the sway of the Bourbons; and as it was much more lately crushed in France. The capacity for freedom is a mental quality. It is our duty so to train the nation as to fit it for the enjoyment and defence of its freedom. If the children of this generation, whether Irish or English, are to be capable of such exertions as those by which their forefathers distinguished themselves, then it is equally our duty to oppose in this House, however unpopular it may be, all educational measures that pave the way for the domination of the Ultramontane despotism which is the more grinding, because it is spiritual and mental; for it deprives those whom it envelopes not only of freedom but of the capacity for freedom, by rendering them incapable of exercising an unfettered and independent mind and judgment. I believe that the hon. Member for Londonderry does not intend to divide the House upon this stage of the Bill; and he is right, for it is only to part of the Bill we object. I venture to say that, if the Bill had been limited to its first portion, as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich has recommended; if, confining its operations to the reward of merit, whencesoever it come, by instituting scholarships and prizes as the result of public examinations; if this Bill had abstained from mixing itself up with the discipline of establishments by inspection, many of which in Ireland, being monastic, are illegal; if this Bill had abstained from mixing itself up and identifying itself with the internal system of these establishments, and confined itself to the reward of merit, as discovered by examination in pupils, whose success would insure a just recompense to their teachers; and if that recompense depended only on their exhibition, through these pupils, of the merit which this House can safely recognize, I should never have seconded the Amendment which has been moved against the second reading of the Bill. But I have done so for another reason. Continual attempts have been made by an abuse of debate to destroy the deliberative functions of this House, and now we are apparently to witness another attempt to achieve the same object by the preservation of a studied silence on the part of the supporters of this Bill. I trust that no Bill which is pregnant with the important results that this measure if passed unaltered must entail, will ever be suffered to pass through this House unnoticed, simply because those whose instructors are interested in the undue extension of the principles embodied in the latter part of the Bill find it convenient that they preserve silence.

denied that there was any wish on the part of Irish Members to avoid discussion of the Bill in all its details. Avoiding various topics which the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) had brandished in the face of the House, he wished to say that the speech of the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) had greatly disappointed him. The hon. Member had admitted that the present system of Intermediate Education in Ireland was unsatisfactory, and he proceeded to find fault with the proposals contained in the present Bill; but he did not attempt to suggest a remedy for the defects in the system of which he complained. It was the duty of the hon. Member, as the Representative of an Irish constituency, not to content him-self with negative criticism, but to make a direct proposal for the purpose of remedying any defects which he thought he saw in the Bill. The hon. Member said he objected to the principle of payment by results for the reason that it tended in the direction of concurrent endowment; but he forgot that the principle was already admitted and acted upon in the national system of education in Ireland, and that it had been found to work well with regard to both denominational and mixed education. On the subject of the payment by or for results, the hon. Member for Londonderry had objected that it would take a larger number of pupils than was likely to be obtained to make up a sufficient payment to the managers; but here, again, he seemed to lose sight of the point, which was, that the main advantage of the payment for results lay in the fact that it encouraged schoolmasters to keep the general body of their pupils up to a high standard of efficiency, instead of employing their time in cramming particular scholars for special examinations. The real value of payment by results would be the test which it would afford to parents, who, by such means, could ascertain that the teachers in the Board Schools were doing their duty to the children. The system of results fees would also be of great value in encouraging the establishment of private adventure schools for children whose parents could not afford to send them to boarding schools, and in this sense alone would these fees have a pecuniary value. It was most important that, as the Bill was to be administered by Commissioners, those Commissioners should be carefully chosen, and he hoped this would be clearly kept in mind. Everything in the Bill depended upon the system and spirit in which its provisions would be administered. The Commissioners should be selected for their fairness, ability, and experience—for their sympathy not with any particular creed or party, but with all creeds and all parties. They should not be mere scholars, but men of prudence, who would be able to apply their knowledge and judgment with common sense. Notwithstanding anything that might be said to the contrary, he had no doubt that such men were to be found in Ireland if the Government would only look for them. He should, dealing with another branch of the subject, like in the course of the debate to hear something from the Government as to the constitution of the Inquiry into the Endowed Schools, Ireland, which the noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill) induced the Government to agree to a short time back. When he brought the subject forward in 1874, he suggested that the endowed schools should either share their endowments with the great body of the people in Ireland, or allow the rest of the people of Ireland to enjoy the funds of any Intermediate Education system which might be made, they themselves retaining their endowments. This Bill not only left them their own endowments, but entitled them, in a broad and liberal manner, to participate in the advantages provided by it. Some day or other the position of the endowed schools, if they were left to enjoy the old and the new advantages, would become the subject of debate in the House. Again, had the Government considered the claims of ladies in reference to this Bill? Deputations, including ladies of every creed, waited on the Lord Chancellor, and they received answers which proved daily more encouraging to the demand they made. It had been suggested to him that the wording of the Bill already admitted them to share its advantages. If this were so, he should be very glad; but if it were not so, the question was worthy the consideration of Her Majesty's Government, as it was considered to be of such importance in Ireland that it would certainly be pressed on their attention at no remote time. Were the Government prepared to supplement the fund, which appeared very narrow as it stood, with something for the benefit of girls? He sincerely hoped that they were. The programme set forth in the Schedule to the Bill was intended for boys; but he believed that women were entitled to an education as broad and as comprehensive as men received, though he hesitated to say that such education should be absolutely identical with that of men. Had the Government considered what would be a proper, programme for women? On the whole, he regarded this Bill as an experiment which, though not without its imperfections, was wisely and honestly proposed for the education of the Irish people, and which, he believed, would be well received by them. Its success depended on the way in which it was received, and still more on the manner in which it was administered. In his opinion, it would be accepted in the spirit in which it was offered. It sought to encourage activity in educational matters on the part of both masters and pupils, and it did not turn to the right nor to the left in order to encourage or discourage any one of the various doctrines which were held on the subject of education. The Irish people did not regard this as a denominational Bill; but simply as a measure which would encourage on all sides the love of study and the zeal for education. He believed that the Bill would be accepted in this neutral spirit by the people of Ireland. He protested strongly, on behalf of the public teachers of Ireland, against the idea put forward by the hon. Member for Londonderry, that the Catholics would be influenced by any ill-feeling towards the Protestants. There was no duty which masters in Catholic schools in Ireland inculcated more firmly than that of Catholics and Protestants being treated alike in all matters purely educational. The success of the measure would depend altogether on its administration by the Commissioners. If well administered by them, he hoped it would open a new era to the young men of his country. In consequence of her position, Ireland did not enjoy the advantages possessed by other countries for commerce, enterprize, and the acquisition of wealth. Irishmen must, therefore, look for prosperity to the cultivation of their minds and the growth of education. He felt certain that the education of the middle class would infuse a new spirit into the people; that it would give them a calmer judgment and a greater firmness of purpose than they now possessed, and that it would give new life to everything that was worthy of life in the national aspirations. The large majority of the Irish people—Celtic in race—were not yet a living force in the affairs and destinies of this Empire. When their reason was fortified by education, he believed they would become an intelligent and valuable factor in guiding their destinies. The Bill aimed not merely at making the Irish people good scholars, but also at carrying into effect these glorious objects, and therefore he gave it his cordial support.

said, he was thankful that Her Majesty's Government had seen their way to bring in the present measure. Although the measure was not exactly in all respects what many hon. Members might wish it to be, it proposed what was, perhaps, the best system which could be devised for settling the great differences that existed on this question in Ireland. If he participated in the fears expressed by the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) he should be as strongly opposed to the Bill as he was; but he failed to see that the measure would be followed by the results anticipated by his hon. Friend, or that it would lead to the system of University education which he had shadowed forth. The Bill would maintain the principle to which his co- religionists were so strongly attached—of united secular and separate religious education. It was his intention, however, to propose in Committee a slight alteration in the Conscience Clause, with a view to strengthening it, so that all the subjects of Her Majesty, whether Catholic or Protestant, would be able to participate in the benefits which the measure would confer upon them. He regretted that female education did not come within the scope of the Bill, and suggested that the Government should allow the Board to deal with that question, and give them a certain sum to be expended in promoting female Intermediate Education in Ireland. With these objections on point of detail, he should support the Bill as an experiment that would in all probability be satisfactory, and he hoped that the House would read it a second time.

could not let the present stage of the Bill be taken without a few observations, more especially in consequence of the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone). Late as was the measure in its introduction, the Government were entitled to the thanks of those representing the Irish people, for dealing with the question. He supported the Bill, not so much for it extraordinary merits, as because he saw in it an honest attempt to meet a great existing grievance. The hon. Member for Londonderry had said the Bill had been received with the suppressed enthusiasm of the Catholics of Ireland. So far as the suppression was concerned, perhaps he was right; but as to the enthusiasm, he very much doubted if it existed. The Bill was regarded as an endeavour to remove difficulties under which, especially, the Catholic population laboured with reference to Intermediate Education in Ireland; but they could not conceal from themselves the fact that the Bill, if passed, would not efface the grievances of Catholics. In the competitions that would arise under the Bill for the different awards both to individuals and institutions, Catholics were not fairly weighted, and did not enter the competition with equality. Therefore, it could not be expected that they would receive the Bill with the enthusiasm which the hon. Gentleman said existed, though its expression was suppressed. At the same time, they did recognize in the Bill an attempt to benefit the whole population, and believed that the Bill, to a certain extent, would meet the generally admitted want. In an educational point of view, then, they approved of the Bill; but upon political or religious grounds their approval would be very limited. They knew that under the Bill the Roman Catholics would be placed at a disadvantage; but were they to decline, on the part of the Irish people, to accept a proposal which would confer certain advantages on the Catholics, because Protestants received greater benefits? Such would be an extremely foolish course; therefore it was that those who represented Catholic feeling expressed their approval of the Bill as far as it went; but he was bound to say, with regard to the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich, that if it were adopted, and all the provisions relating to the result fees struck out, then the Bill, so far from being acceptable, would be one they ought to resist. He was ready to support the Bill, because it would assist the spread of Intermediate Education in Ireland; and when he spoke of education, he meant education in its true sense, as distinguished from mere "cramming." But if the proposal of the right hon. Member for Greenwich wore adopted, instead of encouragement to education—instead of promoting the establishment of new schools, and helping those in existence—it would raise up difficulties against new schools, and hinder the efficacy of those existing. It would tend to the extension of the system of education through "grinders," who would get clever boys into their hands and cram them. If any portion of the Bill were to be omitted, he would prefer to see that portion relating to the prizes struck out. There were certain details in the Bill which he would desire to see modified. He did not see much harm in the Conscience Clause, though he should have preferred to have had it omitted; for it seemed to him inconsistent with the principle of the Bill, which was that secular education should be paid for wherever it was given. In practice, the Conscience Clause would benefit the Catholics more than other denominations, and for this reason—In the Catholic intermediate schools, as a rule, there were no scholars except Catholics; therefore, those schools could not be much interfered with by the clause. But in the Protestant schools there were a small number of Catholics, and it was to these schools that the clause would really apply. Notwithstanding that, he thought it would be more consistent with the framework of the Bill to omit the clause, and he would have much preferred that it had never been introduced. Then, as to the examinations. Of course, he was aware that these, to a great extent, were subject to the control of the Commissioners to be appointed under the Bill; but still, the Bill had an example of what these examinations would be. First, there was the language, literature, and history of ancient Greece and Rome as one subject; then there was the English history, literature, and language as another; and then came the French, German, and Italian languages, literature, and history as a third. He did not think it desirable that a knowledge of both Greek and Latin should be necessary for qualifying in the first subject, or that a knowledge of three foreign languages should be necessary for the third; and he asked the House to consider from what class the children would be taken. Even in regard to the upper classes, how many children could pass an examination in French, German, and Italian languages, literature, and history. According to what was done in University examinations at London and elsewhere, these subjects should be divided, and the student given a choice of two of the languages. It also struck him as remarkable that no reference was made to Irish language and history as a subject for examination. Within the last few days, the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland had consented to place on their Code the Irish language as a subject. The omission, therefore, from the present Bill was the more remarkable, and, in Committee, he should propose the alteration of the Schedule in the direction he indicated—the division of the subjects, and the inclusion of Irish literature and language in those subjects. He had no desire to protract the discussion, and he believed that every Irish Member had no other desire than that the measure might pass after a full and fair discussion.

said, it appeared to him that the argument of the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) against the efficiency of the Bill from an educational point of view was unsound. The argument of the hon. Member seemed to be that the provisions of the measure would not tend to stimulate Intermediate Education in Ireland, and that what was wanted was not better education but more schools. The hon. Member, however, appeared to him to have entirely ignored the well-known economic doctrine of demand and supply. The great merit of this Bill was that it would stimulate and increase the demand, and hon. Members might depend upon it that when the demand was increased the supply would follow. The hon. Member had also said that the Bill was a reversal of a policy of Parliament for 50 years, and had endeavoured to strengthen his argument by reference to the Conscience Clause. He appeared to think that the proper functions of a Conscience Clause was to enforce a system of mixed secular education. No one was more in favour of mixed secular education than he (Mr. Stansfeld) was; but it did not follow that because that sort of education met his view, he should therefore be a party to the imposing of it upon a people whether or not it met with their ideas or necessities. What they had to do as politicians, acting upon the principles of Liberalism in regard to Ireland, was to pay deference to Irish needs, and to the sense and conception in Irish minds of Irish needs, so far as that could be done consistently with the fundamental principles from which they found it impossible to depart. He thought it was desirable that they should not only encourage students to obtain prizes at competitive examinations, but should also do what they could consistently with the principles which must govern legislation on such subjects to secure the good management and the general efficiency of those schools. Therefore he had no objection to make to the part of the Bill which had reference to result fees. With regard to the claims of girls, after the eloquent appeal of his right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich, which had been cheered by both sides of the House, he need hardly say a word on that point. The ideas entertained with respect to the education of girls and boys had undergone a great change of late years. It was now becoming recognized that there could be no antagonism between the claims of boys and those of girls to education; that girls had an equal right with boys to the soundest and best education; and that society was at least equally interested in the soundest and best education being given to girls as well as to boys. It was enough to say that the girls of to-day would be the mothers of a future generation of men, and that the strongest educational influences were exercised over both boys and girls by mothers, in order to satisfy all reasonable people that men, equally with women, were interested in justice being done to girls in that or in any other educational measure. In the 12th section of the Endowed Schools Act of 1869, special provision was made that regard should be had to the claims of girls in respect to endowments. In the present case the fund which Parliament was about to apply to Intermediate Education was one which had been quite as much appropriated for girls as for boys, and for women as for men. But he would not dwell on that argument. He would only urge that that was a fund now at the disposal of Parliament, and that they would not be justified in applying it exclusively to the education of boys, omitting all provision for the education of girls. There was a great movement on foot for the education of girls in Ireland, which was part of the movement of the same character which had been going on in this country. Both the University of Dublin and the Queen's University held examinations now for girls, large numbers of whom had passed with credit; and it was also the fact that a large portion of the well-to-do people in Ireland sent their daughters to this country to be educated. He appealed to the Irish Members whether they would be satisfied with a measure which left them in this position, that they could not educate their daughters at home, but must send them across the seas. With regard to that Bill, without any apprehension as to the ulterior consequences that would follow, he was quite prepared—and he did not think this was inconsistent with acknowledged Liberal principles—to allow the same principle to be applied at some future time to University education. He did not wish to force on the people of Ireland a mixed and secular system of education. What he wished, and what he believed all truly liberal-minded per- sons wished to do, was to help their Irish countrymen to that which they desired, and that to which they were entitled, as far as it could be done consistently with the principles they upheld.

claimed the indulgence of the House for a very short time, in order that he might express the pleasure he felt at the introduction by the Government of this most important measure, which had his full support. Although the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) had formally moved the rejection of the Bill, he had almost intimated that he would not divide the House on that occasion, but would rest content with having had an opportunity of expressing his own individual opinions. He (Mr. Plunket) desired to say that ho believed, as far as he had an opportunity of judging, the Bill would not only meet with the approval of the Roman Catholics, but of the majority of the people of all denominations in Ireland, when they came to understand its provisions. He had every reason to believe that those whom he had the honour to represent, and whose opinions he shared, were altogether in favour of the main principles of the measure. Therefore, he joined in the very general congratulations which had been offered to the Government on their having had the good fortune to bring in a measure for the benefit of Ireland which met with the acceptance of all classes and parties in that country. It should not be forgotten that the late Chief Secretary for Ireland (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) also had a considerable share in the preparation of the Bill, and was entitled to participate largely in the credit of its introduction. He fully admitted what had been said by the hon. Member for Londonderry as regarded the remarkable success of Foyle College, and of several other excellent schools. But there were not enough institutions of that kind; and it could not be denied that in the quantity, and in some parts of the country also in the quality, of the existing intermediate schools of Ireland, great improvement was needed. How was that improvement to be effected? Having given the subject his careful attention, he must say that he saw no other way of doing it than that suggested by this Bill. They might have proposed to endow strictly undenominational schools. But when they had founded these schools there would be considerable difficulties to contend with. In a University, where the higher branches of education were provided by the State, the religious wants of boys might be adequately attended to while pursuing united education, but when they came to intermediate teaching, it was impossible to carry that out all over the country without having recourse to boarding schools; and he agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry, that they could not adopt the principle of united education in boarding schools. He had objected to a Bill formerly for establishing a Roman Catholic University, or College, mainly because public money was to be given without responsibility, and payments were to be made where there was no sufficient guarantee as to results. On that ground he stood as firmly as ever. But in this case, where the endowments were given, the State would get value for the money. He did not, therefore, agree with his hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry that they were giving up any important principle, or parting with any safeguard, in supporting this Bill. He admitted, with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld), the desirability of improving the education of girls, although he differed from him in some of the ideas with regard to women, of which he was so intrepid an advocate. It must, however, be left to the Government to say whether it would imperil the chance of now passing the Bill to introduce provisions on that subject. The hon. Member for Londonderry made an eloquent appeal to the House against the application of the surplus of the Irish Church Fund to the purposes of this Bill. No one more strongly resisted that measure than he did, although he was not then in Parliament. But the Act had passed, and what was the section which professed to control the ultimate use of the Church surplus but a shifting compromise to avoid the great question that had been raised? He believed the results of this measure, which had been so generally—he might say universally—approved on both sides of the House, would be most beneficial. He rejoiced that the Government had brought it forward, and he had much pleasure in supporting the second reading.

in supporting the Bill, considered it was an honest and sincere effort on the part of the Government to remedy a great and admitted grievance under which the people of Ireland had long suffered. He congratulated the Government on the discussion which had already occurred; because, judging from the reception of the Bill on both sides of the House, there appeared little doubt that it would sail through smooth waters, even in Committee. With his known views as to secular education, the speech of the right hon. Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld) afforded good augury that the Bill would be well received, even by the most pronounced friends of secular education. He should have been glad to see even a larger sum than the interest of £1,000,000 applied to the purposes of Intermediate Education. That appeared to him small and inadequate as a means of obtaining the great results expected. He should also be glad to see the benefits of the measure extended to women; but the alterations in the framework of the Bill which would be required with that view might endanger its passing. Besides, if the Bill were extended to girls, an additional sum would be required. He trusted, therefore, that the House might be induced to pass the Bill as it stood. With regard to the alterations suggested by the right hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone) on the subject of result fees, he was satisfied that if it was adopted, it would create great disappointment in Ireland. He considered it most necessary that the Bill should pass this Session; and he would, therefore, support the Government in maintaining it as it stood, though, if they saw their way to extending its benefits to girls, he would be very glad to have it done.

said, his anxiety was to see the Bill passed this Session, because he believed its passing would have the best possible effect in Ireland, not only as regarded the results of the Bill itself in the future, but as showing the Irish people that an attempt had been made by Ministers and the House to deal, it might be imperfectly, with an admitted grievance in an honest and liberal manner. He should therefore endeavour to confine his observations to the few points on which he deemed it necessary to touch, and to make his observations as brief as possible. He felt anxious for the Bill personally, because it was no secret that he had taken a very active part in pressing on Her Majesty's Government to endeavour to pass it this Session. Whether his representations on the subject had any influence on Her Majesty's Government, he did not know; but he made those representations as strongly as he could. The great point he wished to enforce was the necessity of Her Majesty's Government standing by the Bill as it was. In speaking of the satisfaction which this Bill had given the Irish people, he thought the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld) would also be received by them with satisfaction as a declaration of principle. He earnestly begged the Government to stand by this Bill as it was—

"Periculosæ plenum opus aleæ

Tractas: et incedis per ignes

Suppositos cineri doloso."

In dealing with religious susceptibilities, especially in a country like Ireland, where there were so many things to create discontent, they never could tell by what change they might excite objections and difficulties of which they had very little notion at present. Her Majesty's Government had succeeded in framing a Bill which had been accepted by the whole of the Irish people, he did not say with enthusiasm, but as a settlement of this question. Common prudence would suggest that they ought not to change it. He had heard questions discussed to-night that would wreck the Bill. For example, the question of the admission of women to the benefit of the Bill had been raised. Now, unless they wanted to alter the whole of this question before the House, he advised them to leave that question alone. A more harmless proposal than that of the right hon. Member for Halifax apparently could not be made. Every man was as anxious for female education as the right hon. Gentleman was; but they were not all anxious for the kind of female education which the right hon. Gentleman would give. The question of convent schools would be at once raised if the subject of female education were introduced into the Bill, and so would the admission of women to lectures on anatomy. These were questions which might be discussed hereafter; but this Bill was brought in to remedy a defect in the education of boys, and next year, if they were anxious to do so, they might take up the question of female education, but in the name of common sense let it not be mixed up with the present measure. There was another point which ought not to be lost sight of. This Bill did not propose to create a system of Intermediate Education. He would be very glad to have such a system established, and to see foundations like those in England set up in Ireland. He would be very glad to see foundations of King Edward or King John in every town in Ireland; but they could not recall the times when Monarchs established such endowments. What was proposed now was to take existing institutions, if they might be called institutions, whether Protestant or Catholic, which had grown up among the people, and to stimulate and aid them impartially. He would use the language attributed to the Lord Chancellor, and say they wanted only "the manufactured article"—the educated man—without interfering with the process of manufacture. They took the man without inquiring what the institution at which he was educated might be, or whether the master was a Protestant or a Catholic. He had seen in a periodical not generally favourable to education as Irishmen wished it, a great deal of common sense on this subject. It said that Englishmen wished to see Irishmen educated, but they wished to see them educated in their own way. It was argued that the people would be educated with Ultramontane ideas. Well, let a good secular education be given, and if there was anything wrong in the Ultramontane ideas, they would find in that education the best antidote. If schools in Ireland were now deficient in a good secular education, the standard would be raised when those schools were asked to compete with others. They would not only raise the education of the competing boys, but of every boy in the school. There might be a few points in regard to details on which he should like to see an alteration. He agreed with the hon. Member for Roscommon that the Irish language ought to be taught, and he would be glad to see the Conscience Clause removed. He was not alone in that wish. He had seen the speeches of Conservative Peers, who said they thought the clause damaged the Bill. There was great difference as to the necessity for a Conscience Clause in intermediate and in primary schools. When a parent sent his sons to an intermediate school, he was in a position to make terms with the master, which was not always the case with the man who sent his children to a primary school. But he was happy to say that no opposition had been offered from Ireland to the clause as it stood. In the University Bill, to which his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Plunket) objected so much, he inserted a Conscience Clause, and the only person who remonstrated with him on the subject was a gentleman largely engaged in Protestant education. A Conscience Clause, as the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) might use it, would worry every school in the Kingdom; but reasonable and prudent Commissioners might work it without annoyance. The Government had achieved the greatest triumph of any Ministry for many years in regard to Ireland. They had produced an Education Bill which was approved by the Representatives of the Roman Catholics and by Cardinal Cullen, and which at the same time received the support of the hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin. This was a moral miracle, and they ought not to risk that for the sake of making trifling changes in the Bill. Irishmen were now in perfect good humour, and he hoped the House would keep them so, and that it would pass this Bill at once, without giving any of them an opportunity of throwing it out. This Bill made great concessions. It was not all that Irishmen could wish, but it would do an immense deal of good. It would bring many a young man forward hereafter, whether Protestant or Catholic, who, but for the encouragements given by this Bill, would have pined in obscurity. Irish Members, forgetting all their partial differences, ought to unite and say—"Here is a Bill that will satisfy the country. Pass it as fast as you can, and with as little change as possible." He himself would like to see some slight Amendments. If, however, he made a Motion concerning the Irish language, an hon. Member had stated to-night that he would introduce another about Spanish and Portuguese. Some one else might move Turkish and Russian, and then an Eastern debate would arise. To propose Amendments would be setting an evil example, and he would, therefore, ask his Friends to withhold their Amendments. A great deal might be done by the Commissioners. He hoped that they would introduce the Irish language, literature, and history. In conclusion, he would appeal to Her Majesty's Government to pass "the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill;" for that was the cry by which the greatest change ever made in the British Constitution was carried. He hoped his hon. Friends would give up their crotchets, so that the success of the measure might not be imperilled.

Mr. Speaker, this Bill has been accurately described as an educational experiment; but I regard it as an experiment of another kind—it is an experiment on public opinion, and as such it has undoubtedly been attended with marked success; for every section of opinion in England and Ireland has contributed to the general chorus of approval with which the Bill has been received. I have had the advantage of listening tonight to the speeches—so full, I regret to say, of bigotry and intolerance—delivered by the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) and the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate); but as the House seems to have already wisely forgotten everything they said, I am relieved of the necessity of saying anything in reply. They laboured hard to excite false fears and mischievous apprehensions; but, thanks to the common sense of the House, they laboured in vain. The hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt) has appealed to his Friends not to endanger the passing of the Bill by bringing forward Amendments. I fully sympathize with that appeal; but the proposal to include in the Schedule of subjects for examination the language, literature, and history of Ireland, in which, I am glad to find, I have been anticipated by my hon. Friend the Member for Roscommon (the O'Conor Don) is one so obviously just and natural that it required to be only fairly and briefly stated to command unanimous approval; and it is on the merits of that proposal that I would wish to make some observations to the House. Well, now, what is the position of the Irish language? At the request of the Council of the Society for the Preservation of the Irish Language, I gave Notice three months ago that I would call attention to the subject in reference to the teaching in the National Schools and the course of studies in the Queen's Colleges. Since then a Memorial addressed to the National Board of Education in Ireland has had the desired effect as regards the National Schools. The teaching of Irish has been placed on the results programme under the same conditions as that of Latin, Greek, and French; and I take this opportunity of returning my thanks as an Irishman to the National Board for the wise promptitude with which it has, in this instance, determined to execute the national will. Its action opens a new chapter in the history of Irish Government Boards, and gives ground for hope that their proceedings will in future be more conformable than they have hitherto been to the feelings and interests of the Irish people. It must be remembered that we have still a large Irish speaking population. The salutations which travellers in Mayo and the Western counties receive from the peasantry are sure to be conveyed in the rich musical accents of the Gael; and what we want, in the first place, is that those who speak Irish should be taught the language grammatically, so that they may be able to read it and write it as well. It cannot be necessary, I am sure, Sir, in addressing an educated Assembly, like the House of Commons, to enlarge upon the importance of the study of the Celtic language. Scholars have always recognized its scientific value in the department of philology. Dr. Johnson, writing in 1777, to a contemporary of his, the Irish translator and historian, Dr. Connor, used these words—

"If I have ever disappointed you, give me leave to tell you that you have likewise disappointed me. I expected great discoveries in Irish antiquity, and large publications in the Irish language; but the world still remains as it was, doubtful and ignorant. What the Irish language is in itself, and to what languages it has affinity, are very interesting questions, which every man wishes to see resolved that has any philological or historical curiosity. Dr. Leland begins his history too late; the ages which deserve an exact inquiry are those times, for such there were, when Ireland was the school of the west—the quiet habitation of sanctity and literature. If you could give a history, though imperfect, of the Irish nation from its conversion to Christianity to the invasion from England, you would amplify know- ledge with new views and new objects. Set about it, therefore, if you can; do what you can easily do, without anxious exactness. Lay the foundation, and leave the superstructure to posterity."

The question as to "What the Irish language is in itself," about which Dr. Johnson was so anxious 100 years ago, no longer perplexes scholars. The position of Celtic, as one of the most venerable forms of human speech, one of the earliest outgrowths of the philology of the East, has been established to the satisfaction of the learned in these islands, and throughout Europe and America. The still more important work of presenting to English readers "the history of the Irish nation from its conversion to Christianity to the invasion from England," yet remains to be accomplished; because no adequate encouragement has been given to Irish scholars to induce them to prosecute their valuable labours on the manuscript materials of Irish history. When we find Celtic chairs handsomely endowed, and Celtic studios eagerly promoted, in the higher schools of Germany, France, Italy, Denmark, and Switzerland, and see the Universities of Oxford and Edinburgh following Continental example in this respect, it would be nothing less than a national disgrace if ample provision were not made for the cultivation of the Celtic language in Irish Universities and intermediate schools. Parliament made provision for the teaching of Irish in the three Colleges constituting the Queen's University in Ireland; but the Senate of that institution has not included Irish in the degree examination; and, although a prize may be gained for certain proficiency in the Irish language, students will not devote their time to a study which, under the circumstances, can be no help to them in their degree examinations. In view of the great Celtic revival, so to speak, which is now taking place in Ireland, it is to be hoped that the Senate of the Queen's University will see the desirability of making better regulations for the encouragement of the study of our Native language. A great deal remains to be done in the same direction by Trinity College, upon which institution the Irish language has very strong claims—an institution, which respectable authority informs us, was intended at its foundation principally for the Native Irish. Jeremy Taylor, who had been Vice Provost of Trinity, addressing the Secretary of State in 1667, says—

"It is fit that it should be remembered that near this City of Dublin there is a University founded by Queen Elizabeth, principally intended for the Natives of this kingdom."

Irishmen, who now take an interest in the cultivation of their Native language can refer to a high example in the action of one of the greatest characters in Irish history. I mean the statesman and patriot, Henry Flood, who bequeathed £5,000 a-year for this patriotic object. Unfortunately, his will was set aside by a legal technicality, but his intention remains as an instruction to posterity. Lord Ross, in referring to this latest wish of Mr. Flood's, employs such graceful and appropriate language, that I must ask the House to listen for a moment to his words. After specifying particularly how the money was to be applied, Lord Ross continues—

"This was the extensive range of Mr. Flood's bequest to the public. Having first manifested in his will all the wise and tender anxieties and cares for those around him, for whom duty and affection taught him to provide; having for these, when he was about to retire from the world, provided every means of competency, and spread every shade of protection which a prudent and liberal mind could suggest; he then turned his eyes upon Ireland—Ireland, for whose prosperity he had so many years illustriously toiled. His great spirit, while it was just hovering over the tomb, was still busied about the future fame of his country. It dictated those expiring accents which direct that the materials of learning, from all parts of the earth, should be from time to time collected and deposited in the bosom of our University. Often did Mr. Flood remark to me that while in the East ingenious men were collecting and translating, with such laudable industry, the ancient writings of the inhabitants of that region, between the Indus and the Ganges, the valuable materials of our own island were neglected and perishing. He thought that many of the truths of ancient history were to be found at these two extremities of the lettered world; that they would reflect light and knowledge upon each other, and lead to a more certain acquaintance with the early history of man."

Surely, Sir, a University which is proud of the genius of Flood should be guided by the example of his patriotism, and should exhibit some of his enthusiastic devotion to the cause of Native learning and Native literature? A large part of the educational debt due by England to Ireland has reference to the teaching of the Irish language. When the religion of the Native Irish was proscribed, and even their dress and their style of wearing the hair also, it need not be said that their language did not escape the general persecution. A price was put on the head of the schoolmaster as well as that of the priest, and compulsory ignorance was enforced by the law of the land. Some of the methods employed to destroy the Irish language are very amusing to contemplate at the present day. The Irish parent was required to keep a stick and make a notch in it every time his child, disregarding or forgetting the instructions given him at school, ventured to express his thoughts in his Native tongue; and the child had to bring the stick to school every morning, and for every notch it showed he received a specified amount of punishment. This hostility to the Irish language raged with various intensity from the time of the Reformation; but it was fiercest during the eighteenth century, and were it not for the disinterested efforts of Continental scholars, who carried on the writing and printing of Irish books at Paris, Antwerp, Louvain, Rome, and other seats of learning in Europe, some of the richest treasures of the language would have been lost in those dark and penal times. A different policy was pursued towards Scotland. There the customs, traditions, and sentiments of the people, as well as their language and religion, were respected by the ruling power. There all the elements of nationality were recognized and duly appreciated in the government of the country, while in Ireland they were ruthlessly condemned and barbarously persecuted. I will not stop to show how, judging the tree by its fruits in each case, the policy pursued towards Scotland was the wiser one, for the House must feel the force of the painful historical contrast to which I have called attention. Notwithstanding all the hostility which it has encountered, the Native language is still a living force in Ireland, and there is abundant proof of its vitality in the vicissitudes which it has survived. The Irish-speaking population is not composed exclusively of the illiterate. It is estimated that there are 2,000 teachers in the service of the National Board of Education, who are competent to give thorough instruction in the Irish language. The Sacred Word is preached to the people, in the verna- cular, by the most eminent divines of the Catholic Church; and I know that in the extensive Archdiocese of Tuam, a knowledge of the Irish language is a conditio sine qua non of admission to Holy Orders. Now, with respect to the practical objects to be gained by the study of Irish, I wish to quote the opinions of a gentleman who has devoted the thought and labour of a lifetime to the practical work of education in Ireland. I allude to Mr. Keenan, the present Resident Commissioner on the National Board, and formerly Head Inspector of National Schools. In the Twenty-second Annual Report of the Commissioners, page 75, Mr. Keenan says—

"Many good men seem to me to forget that the people might know both Irish and English, and they also forget that by continuing to speak Irish and learning English through its medium, the latter language would be enriched by the imagery and vigour of the mother tongue, and the process of learning would be a mental exercise of so varied and powerful a character, that its disciplinal effect upon the mind would be equal in itself, and by itself, to a whole course of education of the ordinary kind. The shrewdest people in the world are those who are bilingual; borderers have always been remarkable in this respect. But the most stupid children I have ever met with are those who were learning English whilst endeavouring to forget Irish."

Now, if it be desirable, according to Mr. Keenan's theory, that, as far as possible, the people should be taught to speak two languages, what is the best and easiest way to make the Irish a dual-speaking people? They cannot be made such by any amount of encouragement given to the study of Latin, Greek, and French. By the Commissioners' Report for 1877, just issued, I find that only 852 pupils passed in French, only 305 in Latin, and only 90 in Greek. Total in the three languages, 1,247. Now, under the new arrangement, by which Irish has been placed on the same footing as Latin, Greek, and French, the number of pupils learning a second language will, I have no doubt, henceforth, be counted by thousands instead of hundreds, because thousands of Irish boys and girls can learn, with facility, their Native tongue in addition to English; and it is by encouraging them in that study that they can most easily be made a bilingual people. If this encouragement be carried to the higher schools, we may expect equally gratifying results, and a new and power- ful stimulus will be given to literary culture throughout Ireland. It is not often, Sir, that an Irish Member has the satisfaction of pleading a cause into which considerations of Party do not enter; but such is my position here tonight, and I think the cause is one that must be dear to the hearts of all Irishmen, without distinction of Party. Some of the greatest elements of a people's nationality are independent of political institutions, and there is no fact more patent in the history of Europe than that uniformity of language is not necessary to territorial unity; and I have no doubt that the Union between Great Britain and Ireland must stand or fall on totally different grounds. Within the narrow limits of Denmark, German is spoken as well as Danish; in Sweden we find Norse and Finnish as well as Swedish; while the Monarch of the day, like your Norman Conqueror, speaks French. In France there are three languages independently of French proper. In Prussia and Spain there are three or four in each; in Austria five or six, and the Czar of Russia rules over a multitude of diverse tongues. As for the Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, within its own comparatively little boundary, from before the days of Cæsar until now, there has always existed diversity of language. Out of that original diversity, and perhaps I am entitled to add, because of it, you have developed a language which is at once strong, copious, and expressive; and if Irishmen are proud of their language, you are justly proud of yours. I do not hesitate to say that the grandest feature in the history of the English race is the extent to which its language has penetrated every part of the globe. The pride of empire and victorious war may be powerless to animate the breasts of future generations of Englishmen, but they will never cease to glory in the world-wide conquests of the English tongue. They have more cause to rejoice on account of having given their language to an Empire broad as the circuit of the sun, than in the fact of having conquered that Empire by their acts and their arms. The boundaries of States may change and be obliterated for ever—Provinces and Colonies, seeking a larger growth in obedience to the natural law of progressive development, may drop one by one out of the circle of Imperial unity; but they will carry with, them, like the great American Republic, the language and literature in which the brightest thoughts of Englishmen are enshrined, and in which their noblest deeds are lovingly recorded. I can claim no such extended sway for the language of the Gael; nor can the dazzling splendour of success hide from me the ignoble means by which, in too many instances, it was obtained; I only protest that the Celtic language shall not be suffered to expire in the cradle of the Celtic race, but that it shall be preserved, not alone as a colloquial speech in the cabins of the poor, but as a rich adornment of the highest intellectual culture, and as the repository of the thoughts of our poets and sages, in Erin's golden age, when she was the home of illustrious scholars and the University of the world.

said, he regretted that they should have fallen into a wrangle as to the proportions in which various religions should be represented on the Commission, and the devices by which the influence of the Members could be neutralized, and as to how the spoil should be shared. He approved thoroughly of the Bill; but it was an experiment the success of which would depend on the way the examinations were carried out. He protested against any difficulty about religion being met by emasculating the teaching and treating it in such a way as to make the knowledge worthless. He did not agree with the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone) about omitting the latter portion of the Bill; it would be necessary to have some counterbalancing scheme by which smaller and less wealthy schools would have a chance of sharing in the benefits Parliament intended to confer. He regretted that the question as to the claims of women had been imported at all into the discussion of this measure, because it might raise additional difficulties. Of course, they were all in favour of improving the education of women; but, in reality, the endowment fund was not more than sufficient for the young men of Ireland. He joined in the hope expressed by several hon. Members, that the Bill would be passed this Session.

said, he thought the composition of the proposed Board, and the details of the Schedule, might fairly be left to a future stage; but he could not refrain from making one or two observations on the Bill itself. He cordially congratulated the Government on the production of a measure, even as late as in the fifth Session of the present Parliament, so eminently calculated to advance the social interests of Ireland, and to elevate the condition of that country. It had been said that there existed no middle class in Ireland, and that was true to a great extent; but one reason for that might be that the higher education requisite for that class had been hitherto greatly neglected, and this Bill would supply an acknowledged want. The Irish Members were certainly unfortunate; their opposition to measures was called obstruction, and their support, cordial and unanimous in this instance, was distrusted and considered dangerous. He (Sir Eardley Wilmot) entertained no fear of any latent danger in the support so freely given to the Bill by his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt), and other Irish Members. He saw in that support, a recognition of the anxious and earnest desire of the Government to introduce a measure in every way likely to benefit their country; and he, for one, was warmly grateful for their approval and support. It had been argued by his hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) that the Bill aimed at and would lead to Catholic endowment, and was a breach of the compact made in 1869, when the Irish Church was disestablished, and all endowments were to cease, and when the Protestant Church funds were to be only appropriated in one way. If he (Sir Eardley Wilmot) had the same fears and the same opinion, he should strongly oppose the Bill. No one had more earnestly opposed the disestablishment of the Irish Church than he had; he deeply regretted it then, and he regretted it still. But he did not see in the present measure any religious or sectarian element, or any departure from the principle laid down at that time. As regarded the welfare and prosperity of Ireland, he had sometimes complained that measures introduced with that object had been either "damned with faint praise" by the Government, or opposed altogether. Consequently, he rejoiced in his heart to see the commencement, however late, of a new state of things; and he anticipated that the present measure would pass into law, to the universal satisfaction of Ireland, and fruitful of the most beneficial results. He should give it his most cordial support.

concurred in the thanks which had been offered to the Government for the introduction of the Bill; but he could not accept the Bill as a full discharge of the claims of Ireland in the matter of Intermediate Education. He was glad, however, that it could be supported by Irish Members without any deviation from the principles which they had advocated. He protested against the idea that Intermediate Education was to be fostered and promoted by means of exhibitions and prizes, which would not benefit the schools that really required help. The proper principle was that adopted on the Continent, where education was cheapened by means of endowments, and the parent contributed only a small proportion of the cost. Payment by results to schools under competent supervision might work without doing mischief; but it was different in the case of schools over which there was no supervision except such as was involved in sending scholars to examinations. This was a fatal way of giving Government support to Intermediate Education. There was only one other point to which he wished to refer, and that was the exclusion of the National Schools in Ireland from the benefits of this Bill. He was amazed to hear the grounds advanced by the Chief Secretary in defence of this exclusion. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to imagine that the National Schools in Ireland were confined to teaching the three "R's." So far from that being so, the National Schools had sent scholars, in large numbers, directly to the Universities and into the Civil Service. The opinion expressed by the Chief Secretary was not the opinion of the Commissioners of National Education, who had admitted the higher branches of science teaching and gave results fees for them. Latin, French, and Greek were also taught, and he certainly was greatly astonished to hear the Chief Secretary speak as if nothing were taught in National Schools but elementary education. He (Mr. Meldon) saw no reason why they should be debarred from earn- ing results under the Bill; and he, therefore, hoped that in Committee, the slur so unworthily cast upon them would be removed.

said, the Bill had been introduced at a period of the Session when they could not hope—no matter how strong might be their arguments in favour of change—to effect any substantial alteration in the clauses. Neither in this House nor "elsewhere" had the Government given an estimate of the probable working of the schemes they proposed to institute. It must be admitted that £1,000,000 was a large sum; but nothing had been said in support of the selection of that amount, or to show that £500,000, or £1,500,000, or £2,000,000, should not have been the amount chosen. If a Vote had to be submitted to Parliament for this Bill, they should have had some estimate of the cost; but here a sum was put down, and it might be insufficient, or it might be too large. As far as he could make out, this sum of £1,000,000 ought to be too large for the immediate necessities of the case. What was supposed to be the number of students admitted to these examinations, so as to obtain result fees? The Chief Secretary for Ireland had given them no estimate; but the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) thought that 2,000 might be expected to secure result fees. He confessed his own estimate was much lower, and he thought if 1,000 secured result fees it would be the limit, bearing in mind the population of Ireland. If 1,000 result fees were obtained, that would entail a charge of £5,000, or thereabouts, for fees, and there would be 100 exhibitions allotted, involving an annual charge not exceeding £4,000. They would scarcely distribute more than £10,000 in exhibitions and prizes without lowering the standard, so as to make the Bill an injury rather than a benefit to Ireland. They had no guarantee that the funds would not be allotted so as to degrade the standard of education in Ireland; and, therefore, he looked with great jealousy to the composition of the Board which would be intrusted with the management of the system about to be established. The members of the proposed Board would be nominees of the Castle, and past experience did not warrant them in placing much confi- dence in Government Boards in Ireland. He should prefer to see the Board nominated by the University of Dublin and the Queen's University, and he should not even object to the Institution in St. Stephen's Green having a voice in the nomination. He objected to the appointment of two Assistant Commissioners. It was the old objectionable system of dual government, founded on the notion that they could not appoint a Catholic to an office of this kind, without having a Protestant to watch him, and vice versâ. By this dual government they added to the expense, and diminished the energy of the Board. If the Bill had been introduced at an earlier period of the Session, he should have suggested that it ought to provide, in the first place, for the examination of boys of 15 years in the elements of an English education only. Prizes, in the form of exhibitions, given as the result of such examinations, would enable boys to proceed from the national to higher schools. At this period of the year, however, there was little hope of having such a suggestion adopted. He was glad to hear the advice which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich had given to Her Majesty's Government with respect to the allotment of result fees to the managers of the intermediate schools. The result fee question was very important with respect to future legislation, and not the less after what had been said in "another place" as to this Bill being a first step towards the reform of University education. It would, he had no doubt, lead to the giving of public money for the partial support of strictly denominational institutions. He thought that the Conscience Clause contained in the Bill was absolutely useless, and had better be done away with altogether, if it could not be made stronger; for there was no compulsion on all the schools which received aid to receive any pupil who chose to come to them. He could see no reason why this principle of Intermediate Education should not be extended to girls, and he was glad to hear, when the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich alluded to the subject, and eloquently pleaded on behalf of the girls, he was much cheered by the Irish Members. The increased number of competitors would be a security against the lowering of the standard of education, and their experience in this country showed that in the senior classes a larger number of girls than boys won honours at the Cambridge Local Examinations. He hoped that the Bill would be amended, so as to give effect to the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman.

, in supporting the Bill, observed that 11 years ago he had in that House advocated the encouragement of Intermediate Education in Ireland, and expressed himself in favour of payment by results. It was proposed to take, for the purposes of this Bill, £1,000,000 from the so-called surplus revenues of the disestablished Church. He thought this scarcely necessary, as there was still remaining a large sum which could be more appropriately applied to the purpose, and which was derived from the disestablishment, by the late Lord Derby, in 1834, of certain Bishoprics and Archbishoprics. He only said this in the way of criticism, and again wished to express a general approval of the Bill as far as it went.

said, that he would give his hearty support to this measure through all its stages. It was an honest and sincere attempt to grapple with a difficult problem, the solution of which had been too long delayed, and he was happy to say that the Presbyterian Members from Ulster, both Liberal and Conservative, had determined to give it their cordial support.

wished to withdraw the Amendment. His chief object in moving it was to obtain a full and fair discussion of the details of the Bill. He regretted that no Member of Her Majesty's Government had thought it right or necessary to make a single remark in answer to the objections and suggestions which were made on both sides of the House.

observed, that in the earlier part of the Session he used to object to the Votes on this account; but the Government always stated that the Votes were only for stationery, or some other incidental matters, and that the House could be divided on the main Question. Yet, although the opportunity of dividing upon the main Question had been promised, it had never arrived. The Government had brought in a Bill dealing with Education in Ireland, and several Members on that side of the House had raised objections to it. Under these circumstances, the question arose as to what the Irish Members should now do? For his own part, although he intended to be guided by the views of his Colleagues, he did not wish to have a long debate on Irish Education when they already had had a debate on Intermediate Education in Ireland, and when shortly the whole question of Irish Education would be fully entered into. For that reason, he should not raise a long discussion at that stage as he should otherwise have done. But it was only right that the Irish Members should formally protest against this Vote. There was no doubt that the Queen's Colleges in Ireland were not supported by the bulk of the people, and were repugnant to their feelings. In the Queen's Colleges no religion at all was taught; but all creeds in Ireland were religious, and objected to this system. Formerly, a great deal of money, between £50,000 and £100,000, was given by the State, or from very old endowments, and thrust down the throats of the people of Ireland in the shape of education; yet, although they objected to the system thus supported, the amount was reckoned in the Esti- mates as money spent on Ireland. The course he proposed to take under the circumstances was to move that this Vote of £12,817 should be reduced by the sum of £10,000.

doubted the desirability of the course proposed to be taken by the hon. and gallant Member for Galway. He did not object to a protest being made; but he was afraid that a division taken under present circumstances would have the effect of weakening any protest that might be made. He thought a half opposition was not a wise thing, and he would, therefore, appeal to his hon. and gallant Friend not to press his Amendment to a division.

also felt that a half opposition ought not to be offered, and he would recommend his hon. and gallant Friend to offer a whole opposition in the shape of a protest. He did not think, however, that under the peculiar circumstances in which this Vote came on, it would be wise on the part of his hon. and gallant Friend to afford an excuse or pretext to anybody, who might be supposed to be desirous of availing himself of it, for saying that the opposition of the Irish Members in reference to the Queen's Colleges justified any attempt the Government might make for withdrawing from the proposals which they were making on another subject. He, therefore, intended to content himself with simply recording his protest against these Estimates, in order that he might not be shut out next year from taking the course which the circumstances of the time might render desirable.

joined with his hon. and learned Colleague (Mr. Butt) in deprecating a division on the present occasion. He did so for the reason that, so far as the principle went, that principle had already been frequently asserted by repeated divisions.

said, that as he was about the only Irish Member in the House when the Vote for the Queen's University was put from the Chair, owing to the speedy way in which the Estimates were brought on, perhaps he might be allowed to explain why he did not raise any opposition to that Vote. At the beginning of the Session he took a very different view respecting the Estimates for the Queen's University and Colleges from that which he held at present. He thought at that time that the only opportunity that would be afforded to Irish Members of showing their sense of the injustice with which Ireland had been treated in the matter of University Education would be when the Estimates for the Queen's Colleges were proposed; and, for his own part, he—and he believed many of the Irish Members also—had determined not to make a half-fight on the question of these Estimates, but to make a very real and severe fight. But the aspect of the case was now entirely altered. They had learned from a very high authority in the other House, that not only was the Bill, which they had been discussing that night, for the purpose of settling the question of Intermediate Education in Ireland, but that it was also intended to be the prelude to a settlement of the question of University Education in that country. Now, the question of the Estimates for the Queen's Colleges was connected with the subject of University Education in Ireland, and surely they might wait patiently until next Session and give the Government a chance of settling that question before taking action upon these Estimates? He did not see what object was to be gained even by taking a division against the Estimates. He did not approve of half plans. He did not believe in merely making a protest in that House about anything. He would only remind the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that just as he relied earlier in the Session upon the honour of the Irish Members in reference to this question of the Estimate for the Queen's Colleges, so the Irish Members now relied upon the honour of the right hon. Gentleman to settle the question of Intermediate Education this Session; and, if possible, to settle that of University Education in the next.

quite concurred in the view that unless they were to have a real battle it was better not to have a sham fight. Having already made a protest in the course of the present Session, he thought they might allow this Vote to pass without putting the Committee to the trouble of taking a division. He, therefore, joined in the appeal of his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt), that this matter should not be pressed to a division. He did not see what good could be got from it. There was, however, one matter to which he desired to call the attention of the Committee, and that was the unusual and unprecedented course which had been adopted on the present occasion. Certainly, since he had had the honour of a seat in Parliament, he had never known the Irish Education Estimates to have been introduced without a single word being said, or any explanation given by the Chief Secretary for Ireland, who was officially charged with this business. This was the more remarkable, when they considered the very large question which was involved, and which was discussed at an earlier period of the Session—namely, the question of the remuneration of the National School teachers. They were all expecting that when the Estimate came on they would have some declaration on the part of the Government as to what was going to be done in the matter. Certainly, the English Education Estimates would never have been allowed to pass without a single word being said by way of explanation on the part of the Minister who had charge of them. However, as the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland had not taken him into his confidence, he should, on the Report of Supply, endeavour to extract from him the information which, out of courtesy to the Committee, the right hon. Gentleman ought to have given them on the present occasion. It was the first time that such a thing had ever happened; and it was unprecedented in the history of Parliament that the Irish Education Vote should be treated in such a manner.

was sorry to find that the hon. and learned Gentleman thought he had been in any way wanting in courtesy either to him or the Committee. He (Mr. J. Lowther) certainly was not aware that he had ever entered into any engagement to make known the decision at which the Government might arrive with regard to the question of the Irish National School teachers upon the Estimates. Such an idea had never entered into his head. He stated at the time that it was a matter that would receive the attention of the Government, and that, in fact, it had been referred by the Treasury to actuaries, and that the Government were taking other measures with a view of arriving at a decision. But he had never for a moment held out any hope that during the present Session he would be prepared to deal with the question. As to the complaint that he had not contributed to swell the debate that night, he thought that what had fallen from hon. Gentlemen who had referred to the subject of the Queen's Colleges had supplied a sufficient justification of that course. He thought that he would best consult the convenience of the Committee if he confined himself to an acknowledgment of the very fair manner in which this matter had been dealt with by the Representatives from Ireland generally, and declined to re-open a controversy which all seemed to have agreed to allow to rest for the present.

remarked, that although it was his own belief that they ought to take a division, yet he was not going to set his opinion against that of several Members of the Irish Party, and particularly the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt), and he should certainly withdraw his Amendment. The people of Ireland would understand that if they did not divide it was owing to the very peculiar circumstances of the case that they took that course, and not because they in any way sanctioned this Vote. They had divided against the principle which it asserted several times at the beginning of the Session, so that Irish Members would no longer be open to the reproach addressed to them from the front Bench, that ever since the Vote was proposed no division had been taken against the Queen's Colleges.

explained, that he did not mean to convey to the Committee that the Chief Secretary had given any promise on the subject of Irish National School Teachers. What he had stated was, that it was the custom on the introduction of the Irish Education Esti- mates for the Minister to make a statement, and he had referred to the fact that a Resolution had been passed by the House that the immediate attention of the Government should be given to the question of the remuneration of these teachers.

Order, order! I must point out to the hon. and learned Member that the question which he is now discussing has reference to a Vote which has been already passed.

asked, whether the Government were in a position at the present time to give the Committee any explanation as to the state at which the proceedings had arrived with reference to the long promised establishment of a Museum of Science and Art in Dublin? He did not know if this was the Vote which the Government would think the most convenient for making any statement on the subject. If not, he would sit down; but whenever the proper time arrived, he should be glad of some explanation. It was only reasonable to ask for some explanation at the end of three years of good intention, and no realization, as yet.

said, he did not know that he could add very much, at the present moment, to the information already in the possession of the hon. and learned Gentleman. He thought, however, that he might give him the assurance that the matter was in progress, and he hoped it would soon be brought to a satisfactory conclusion.

did not know whether this was quite the right Vote on which to bring this matter forward. He wished to inquire whether this was the Vote under which the Government proposed to appropriate money for the purposes of the Royal Dublin Society, and its conversion into a School of Science and Art. He rather thought not. Mr. J. LOWTHER: This is the Irish Academy Vote.] What he wished to know was, whether the Government proposed under this heading to appropriate any money for the purpose of the New Museum of Science and Art in Ireland, because he really did not see what other opportunity there would be of discussing this question, except that presented by the Vote itself. He knew that the question of the Governing Body was in a very unsatisfactory state, and the Irish Members had been waiting to hear from the Government what proposals they intended to make with regard to the constitution of that Body. They were very anxious to know whether it was to be an Irish Governing Body, or whether it was to be appointed by the South Kensington authorities, and under the direct control of that Institution? A great many people in Ireland, who were very much interested in this question, thought it would be a very great misfortune if the Governing Body of the New Museum of Science and Art was not of such a character as to make it essentially an Irish Institution, and not a mere appanage of South Kensington.

thought the hon. Member would find that the discussion of this subject would be more conveniently taken on Vote 2, Class 4, of the English Education Estimates, which included votes for the Dublin Science and Art Museum, National Library, and one or two other things.

asked the meaning of the item in the Vote of £100 for purchase of treasure trove?

observed, that he gathered from the statements of the Government that a portion of the Irish Vote was included in the sum voted for England. He thought they had some right to complain of that system; for it prevented them, in a great measure, getting the explanations they required.

begged to move that Progress be reported.

hoped the Motion for reporting Progress would not be pressed. If the Votes were examined, it would be found that the sums required for the Irish Museum and School of Art were placed amongst the English Estimates. With reference to the Museum of Science and Art, there was a strong feeling in Ireland against its being entirely under the control of the South Kensington officials, and not under Irish management.

observed, that the ordinary process had been reversed in the present case. Ministers had been unwilling or unable to explain the Votes, and the hon. and learned Member for Limerick had done so for them.

disclaimed any idea of explaining the Votes. The Estimates were there, and he gave no information upon them, but only pointed out what was to be found in them.

said, that an appeal had been made to the Ministers for information, which they did not give, but which had been given by the hon. and learned Member for Limerick. That explanation was, to his mind, entirely satisfactory.

said, that he had attempted to explain this Vote, and to point out that the Museum to which reference had been made would be found under the head of the Art and Science Department, in Vote 2, Class 4, of the English Education Estimates. He attempted to rise at the moment the hon. and learned Member for Limerick rose, and was prepared then to make the statement that, rightly or wrongly, the Irish Museum of Science and Art was included in the English Estimates.

said, that it had been the custom since 1853 to take these Votes in this manner. The Royal Irish Academy was a learned institution which had no connection with the Museum of Science and Art. The proper person to make explanations on the subject of the Museum was the Vice President of the Council, who was not expected to be in the House that night.

thought the Government should give some information as to the constitution of the Governing Body of the Museum.

inquired, Whether the Government intended the Annals of Ulster, which was being published at the expense of the country, to be issued at such a price as would be within the means of ordinary persons, or whether it was to be only for the use of the members of the Royal Irish Academy?

was not in a position to answer the question.

drew attention to what he considered the injustice to which certain classes of Staff officers were now subjected. There were some Staff officers, such as deputy quartermaster generals and deputy adjutant generals who were occupied from six to eight hours a-day working in an office. Their duties involved a great deal of correspondence and labour, and were of a very responsible character. The deputy quartermaster general had the superintendence of the removal of all the troops in his district, and was continually in correspondence with the War Office concerning trifles. Yet these hard-worked Staff officers only got the same pay as aides-de-camp, whose duties were of the lightest character. Four aides-de-camp were kept at Dublin Castle, and their only duties were at the Official Reception, which lasted but for a few hours at a time. To mark his sense of the inequality he had mentioned, he should move to reduce the Vote by the sum of £324, the salaries of those gentlemen.

did not think that the hon. and gallant Member had made out any case for the reduction which he sought. So long as the position of the Viceroy of Ireland was sanctioned by Parliament, he thought it could not be denied that the dignity of the position required the presence of those officers.

observed, that he wished particularly to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the gross injustice of giving those officers, who did nothing but amuse themselves, the same Staff pay—namely, 9s. 6d. per day—as a class of officers who were worked very hard. He should not take a division upon the matter; but hoped the grievance would be remedied.

was surprised at the hon. and gallant Member making the suggestion he had, as he would never be forgiven by the ladies of Dublin.

begged to withdraw his Motion.

said, that he did not intend to propose the Motion to strike out the salary of the Chief Secretary, of which he had given Notice. The reason he had had for wishing to raise the question was, that the duties of the Chief Secretary were too multifarious for them all to be well done, even if the Office were held by a Gentleman so well qualified as the present Chief Secretary. But as this question must come before the House in its entirety before a very distant period, he should not now make the Motion of which he had given Notice.

said, that the Board of Works in Ireland and the Local Government Board ought to be presided over by Parliamentary Leaders, as they were in England. It was utterly impossible for any Chief Secretary—however good—to give his attention to all the offices of which he had charge, and the result was that the Departments were virtually irresponsible. He had already brought forward a Motion on the subject, and he could assure the Government that it would be pressed again and again until the system, by which the Chief Secretary was the nominal head of those Departments—which were thus made virtually irresponsible—was abolished. If any hon. Member would take the trouble to read the Reports relating to the management of the Board of Works in Ireland, he was sure he would agree with him. The Board of Works had not kept a proper minute-book for the last five years. When cross-examining the Clerk of the Board on a Committee, he said he held a minute-book, and produced it. But the first thing he (Mr. Butt) saw in it was a report of a speech of his own in Parliament attacking the Board. In his opinion, the details of Irish Government would be much better brought before the House, if the two Boards he had mentioned were presided over by responsible Ministers with seats in Parliament.

remarked, that the Veterinary Department was included in the Vote for the Chief Secretary's Office, and for that reason he wished then to make a few observations with regard to its management. The Irish Veterinary Department was less expensive than the English, but it had not so good a reputation. The total cost of the Irish Veterinary Department was £1,954; on reference to page 90 of the Estimate, it would be seen that the expenses of the Veterinary Department in England amounted to £15,000. Last year there was also a Supplementary Estimate for the English Veterinary Department, making the cost of it altogether £29,000. Yet, although there was this contrast between the cost of the English and the Irish Veterinary Departments, there were more cattle in Ireland than in England and Wales together. In England £2,270 was voted for Inspectors, their salaries ranging from £100 to £460 a-year, and their number might be roughly put down at 20. In Ireland, on the other hand, there was only one Inspector. If there were much cattle disease in Ireland, it should be borne in mind that it was not because the cattle in Ireland were less unhealthy than in England, but because they were in greater numbers. In his opinion, the cattle disease would be much better dealt with by a central authority than a local one. Why should they not have 8, or 10, or 14 Inspectors in Ireland? They had half as large an area as England, and fully the same amount of cattle. It seemed to him that this was a matter of great practical importance. The Veterinary Department in Ireland was stinted, and at the same time the double inspection of cattle from Ireland was commented upon. He thought the Government ought to look into this matter, with a view to provide some mode of inspection in connection with the Central Department as in England, and that the Estimate for the Irish Veterinary Department ought to bear a more equal proportion than they now did to those of England.

wished to allude to the imperfect inspection of cattle coming from Ireland to England. Anyone acquainted with the circumstances of the case knew that from time to time in the county of Cumberland most grave results had followed from the improper inspection of cattle at Belfast. No doubt, foot-and-mouth disease would exist in Ireland as well as in England. But those who had paid attention to the subject might have read a valuable Paper of the Chief Constable of Cumberland, in which instances were given by him of cattle landed at Whitehaven and other places in Cumberland from Ireland, having brought disease into the county. What was required was a better inspection of cattle on the other side of the Channel. It was a great fault on the part of the Government of Ireland that they did not see the inspection of cattle better carried out. Only nine persons were employed by the Veterinary Department in Ireland; one of these was employed in cleaning an office, another was a messenger, and three were persons employed in the police. There was, practically, only one Inspector, at 8s. 6d. per day; and a Director, who could not be expected to be in more than one place at the same time. They wished to continue the importation of cattle from Ireland as freely as possible, but it was absolutely necessary that cattle should be properly inspected before they left Ireland. He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman—now he had had his attention drawn to this subject—would see that the matter complained of was remedied.

agreed that there ought to be a more stringent inspection in Ireland. If there were, the dual inspection, which was so much objected to, would be avoided. He would have no objection to a rigid inspection at Irish ports. Then, unless disease were discovered, animals could be landed with- out examination in England, and trade would be facilitated between the two countries without creating danger or difficulty.

said, the hon. Member for Kendal (Mr. Whitwell) was not correct in his supposition that his attention had not been called to the subject; because, during the last few days, he had been in communication with gentlemen on it, and it was likely to occupy the attention of Parliament at no very distant period. Several days in the week were set apart for the consideration of the Cattle Bill; and he, therefore, hoped that they would not be prematurely drawn into a cattle debate. The question raised had already been under the consideration of the Government, and their intentions would in due course be communicated.

said, before the Vote passed, he wished to point out to the right hon. Gentleman what he did not seem to be aware of—that in passing the Irish Cattle Plague Bill through Parliament great injustice was done to Ireland. A certain class of Inspectors in England were paid by the Department; but in Ireland this was not done, and as a consequence, the ratepayers of Dublin had to pay for the inspection of cattle which did not belong to their district, had nothing whatever to do with them, and did not benefit them in the slightest degree. He thought this injustice should be remedied.

said, he did not intend to be drawn into a general debate on the Cattle Bill; but he only wished to remark that, so far as his experience extended, a most rigid system of inspection was practised at the ports, and no beast was allowed to be embarked without having been examined. He did think, however, some better regulations might be made.

said, before the Vote passed, he wished to call attention to an item which seemed to him to be very extravagant. Under sub-head D, there were charges for journies to London and Dublin of draftsmen of Bills amounting to £480. He had in his hand a list of the number of Irish Bills prepared and brought in by the Government during this Parliament. They were very few in number, and chiefly Bills of a very formal character, such as Local Government Provisional Order Bills. He could only suppose, therefore, that the Go- vernment were about to turn over a new leaf, and, with the intention of bringing in a great number of Irish Bills, had given their draftsmen a good deal more work.

remarked, that the Government had desired to be as economical as possible.

wished to know whether the Government meant to go on any longer? He was informed that there would be a considerable amount of discussion on the next Vote, and that it was not at all likely that it would be finished that evening. He would, therefore, move to report Progress.

remarked, that the evening had been given up to these Votes.

said, he was going to move the same Motion, not with the intention of dividing on it, but merely in order that he might ask the Chief Secretary not to press the next Vote. He had every desire to assist the Government in passing the Estimates, but that Vote, at any rate, ought not to be passed without some conversation; and, therefore, he thought he was justified in asking the Chief Secretary to postpone it.

said, they had now reached an hour when Supply was only taken by the indulgence of the Committee; and, therefore, he thought the request of the hon. and learned Member quite reasonable. So long as the Votes were not seriously contested, he hoped they might be allowed to go on.

very readily accepted the suggestion, and would withdraw his Motion.

said, some questions arose on this point which would not delay the Committee very long, but were well worthy of discussion. First, he wished to call attention to the staff of Medical Officers and Medical Inspectors employed. They had recently passed a Public Health Bill for Ireland through that House, and, in order that it should work satisfactorily, it was necessary that the Local Government Board should properly administer the duties confided to them by the Act. It was important in Sanitary Acts that there should be proper inspection. In England that was done most satisfactorily. If there was an outbreak of disease anywhere, a special officer was immediately sent down to inquire into the cause of the disease, and to ascertain what measures were necessary to put an end to it. In Dublin, on the other hand, they had had for some time past an exceedingly severe outbreak of small-pox; but, so far as he knew, the Local Government Board had taken no steps whatever to ascertain the causes of that epidemic, or the means by which it could be stopped. The Public Health Committee had, no doubt, been working exceedingly hard in this direction; but, at the same time, duties of that kind should not devolve upon it. If the Local Government Board had not done its duty in Dublin, what must be the case in remote country districts? Unless the Local Government Board was provided with Inspectors to send about the country and make inquiries, the Public Health Act would be useless. These Inspectors were necessary not only to inquire into the causes of epidemics, but to see that the sanitary officers in various places were discharging their duties. An officer often found great difficulty in discharging his duty in an efficient way. There were private interests which he might interfere with, and so injure himself. That rendered it all the more necessary that there should be some supervising officer to see that the work was done. These officers were provided in England; and, therefore, he hoped the matter would be attended to. Another matter to which he wished to call attention was the very great inducements and facilities for vaccination held out in England, as compared with Ireland. When he first moved in this matter, some four years ago, there was £300 a-year devoted to dispensing lymph throughout the country. That had now been increased to £1,200, but still the supply of lymph to the Institution in Dublin was not at all what it ought to be or what was at all sufficient for the requirements of the country. The quantity to be had in England was unlimited, and he did not see why it should not be so in Ireland—whereas, in fact, medical men could not be supplied there with all that they wanted. There was a certain amount of feeling against vaccination in England; but that did not exist in Ireland, and the Vaccination Laws could, therefore, be carried out in that country most effectually. He understood that the authorities in Ireland did not require the Constabulary to be vaccinated, and that in consequence small-pox was raging amongst them. If the statement were true, this ought not to be. In Ireland, nothing was given to encourage vaccination, except this paltry sum of £1,200, for the supply of vaccine gratuitously; whereas, in England, £16,000 was voted annually to medical men as gratuities for successful vaccination. This was very important, because they had had epidemics of small-pox of late; whereas, there was no doubt the disease could be stamped out if proper precautions were taken, and the vaccine were properly used. Again, the fee for vaccination in Ireland was 1s., no matter how far the medical man had to travel; whereas, in England, it averaged 2s. 6d. No doubt, this was a dry subject, but it was an exceedingly important one, and well deserved the attention of the President of the Local Government Board. He hoped that next Session they would see that the matter had received his careful consideration, and that something had been done.

said, the Local Government Board was in a very bad way. Last year he divided the Committee on the salary of one Commissioner, and this year, if nobody else did it, he should feel it his duty to divide the Committee on the salaries of all the Commissioners. He had some experience of this Board, and he was of opinion that it did not do its work in at all a satisfactory way. In England, the Poor Law Commissioners were converted, as the Local Government Board, into a real living, working effective body, officially represented in the House, and with many men of high official position upon it; but in Ireland three Commissioners, every one of whom had held his position for a very long time, were converted by a stroke of the pen into the Board. At first it was attempted to make a few clerks in the Chief Secretary's Office into the Irish Local Government Board, under the title of the Local Government Board of the Chief Secretary's Office. This failed, owing to the Act being badly drawn and unworkable. Then the three Poor Law Commissioners were made the Board, with the addition, pro formâ, of the Chief and Under Secretaries. From his experience as Chairman of the Public Health Committee of the Dublin Corporation, he said the Board was utterly useless. In England, the Board did its work, issuing Circulars, attending to outbreaks of infectious disease, and looking into various other matters; but in Ireland they did nothing, or as next to nothing as was possible. As a matter of fact, as a Sanitary Board, they did no sanitary work, exercised no supervision whatever, and did nothing to stimulate local bodies to attend to their duties. Unless they re-organized this Board, the Public Health Act that they had recently passed would be a dead letter. He would give them a sample of what kind of men this Board was composed of. One of the Commissioners sent a complaint to the Dublin Public Health Committee a little while ago. He said that his house was rendered unfit to live in, because of the public sewers not being ventilated; and gave them a pretty little disquisition how the sewer gas rose in an opposite direction to the fall of the liquid contents of the sewer, and entered his house by the house drain, causing his servant to get typhoid fever. The sanitary authority ventilated the sewer, and then investigated this Commissioner's own house. They found it in a condition simply frightful—in fact, when the basement was torn up, it was found to be little better than a cesspool. In this case it might have been said— "Doctor, cure thyself." But what hope was there of real sanitary reform with such men at the head of affairs. Last year, at the request of the hon. and learned Member for Limerick, a Commission investigated the Board of Works, and it was found to be in a very rotten state. He was convinced, if an impartial inquiry were made into the state of the Local Government Board, it would be found to be in an infinitely worse state. That being so, he would not divide the Committee against any one individual of the three composing the Board; but would move the reduction of the Vote by £4,200, the salary of the three Commissioners, because he believed they did no effective work.

said, he had carefully considered the position of these Commissioners as affected by the Public Health Act, and no doubt the new duties imposed on them would require consideration as regarded the staff. He certainly would inquire concerning vaccination. He was not aware at all that vaccination had been neglected in the Constabulary, until the hon. Member mentioned it, and he would inquire into the matter. He knew that the hon. Member for Tipperary (Mr. Gray) felt strongly about the Commissioners; but he could only say that he knew those gentlemen were actuated by a sincere desire to do their duty, and he hoped the Committee would support the Vote.

said, it was well known that one of these gentlemen had done nothing for years upon years except sign his name on the back of cheques for his own salary. No mere re-construction of the Office, in fact, would do. These gentlemen had been where they were too long, and were now too old for work. The Chief Secretary was in error also in supposing that new duties had been imposed by the Public Health Act. It was little more than a consolidation of the law which the Local Government Board had neglected to put into effective operation.

said, everyone who came from Ireland knew the Local Government Board to be thoroughly useless. But even if they were not to blame that was no reason why a Parliamentary Committee should not be allowed to investigate the way in which they discharged their duties. The health of Ireland was a very important consideration. For months a tremendous epidemic had been raging in Dublin, and nothing whatever had been done to stop it, although the medical men of the city had foretold its coming long before. The hospital accommodation, too, was so bad that for some time people had to be nursed in wooden sheds, until something better could be got ready. The same thing had happened before; and therefore, he thought they were justified in asking for an inquiry, and should not be put off in the cavalier way they had been by the Chief Secretary. The statements they made about the Board of Works were verified by the Report now on the Table; and that, he contended, justified their asking for an inquiry into this Board also. He did not think there was a Member who knew anything of this Board who would not endorse the representations made that night on this very important subject.

said, the experience of Dublin was not singular. In a small town in his county, 10 per cent of the population died from an epidemic, and he was quite sure half of them might have been saved if proper and prompt measures of repression had been taken. Whenever there was an outbreak of small-pox, they ought, at the moment, to know what to do, just as a General at the head of the Medical Department would act. There ought to be plans ready cut-and-dried. A small town in the county of Galway had furnished a striking example of the necessity of prompt measures being taken with regard to this disease. He thought the Irish Members ought to press their opposition; and if they persisted in doing so, he certainly would support them, for unless they pressed this question upon the consideration of the Government, the deaths of many persons in Ireland would lie at their doors.

was reluctant to speak upon this question, because it was a serious thing to do, or say, anything which might diminish the confidence of the people of Ireland in the beneficial effects of vaccination; for there could be no doubt that such results had been arrived at, so far as he had been able to ascertain. But he looked with some concern at what he considered the carelessness which the President of the Local Government Board seemed to display in regard to the question of obtaining a supply of pure lymph; for now the medical men of Ireland were supplied with vaccine matter from English sources, and had not their own to go to, as formerly. In passing, he might observe that the medical practitioners in Ireland had always manifested the greatest desire to obtain pure lymph, exercising the utmost care in collecting it; and for this trouble they had not been at all recompensed. But all that had been changed, and now vaccine matter was sent to Ireland from England. That course had been adopted in compliance, he believed, with the request of the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Mitchell Henry), who had complained of the difficulties the medical men laboured under, and asked that they might, in future, be able to obtain lymph for the purposes of vaccination from the Institution in England that collected the matter. But it was a remarkable circumstance that the outbreak of small-pox, to which reference had been made, occurred shortly after the lymph had been drawn from the new sources of supply; and it was certainly calculated to create considerable distrust in the minds of the people who had hitherto thought well of vaccination, when they observed that the sending of matter from England was followed by a severe outbreak of disease in Dublin, such as had not been witnessed for a considerable number of years. He should like to see greater attention paid, by those who were responsible, to the collection of lymph, and greater security given that it should not be the vehicle of disease. So far as he could gather from what had fallen from the President of the Local Government Board, there was no security attending the collection of this lymph. The people might, at any time, be blood-poisoned, or infected with diseases of the most horrible character, through impure vaccine matter being used when persons were re-vaccinated. He hoped, therefore, that the Government would be pressed to give some guarantee that the lymph they supplied was not likely to communicate any disease.

scarcely thought he could have rightly heard the hon. Member who had just sat down, when he understood him to say that no adequate care was taken by the Local Government Board to secure lymph of a pure character. As he had already explained on a former occasion, the contrary was the fact. Every conceivable care was taken to obtain pure lymph for vaccination purposes; and he, therefore, defied any hon. Gentleman to point out a single case in which lymph sent out from the Local Government Board Office had been followed by any deleterious consequences whatever. Every specimen of lymph that was issued, whether to Ireland or elsewhere, was first subjected to the most minute microscopical examination; and where there was the slightest doubt as to its purity, the matter was rejected. He was not aware that any imputation had ever been cast upon the purity of the lymph supplied.

said, after all, that was only a collateral issue. The main question was, would the Government institute an inquiry into the working of this Department, similar to that made into the management of the Board of Works. However unpleasant, the facts ought to be brought to light by an investigation. Certain statements had been made in the Committee that evening which could not be ignored. They had been made on the authority of the hon. Member for Tipperary (Mr. Gray), and it became the duty of some Member of the Government to refute them, or else grant an inquiry. He appealed to the Government to intimate their intention of making some inquiry into the working of this Department.

said, it seemed to him that this Local Government Board was in a thoroughly demoralized condition; and that being so, he would not attempt to interfere with it. There was, however, a question raised in the early part of the discussion by the hon. and learned Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon) to which he should like to refer for a moment, as to the appointment of a further number of Medical Inspectors. For his own part, he was rather disposed to insist upon the present Inspectors per- forming their duty, and when it was found that they discharged their duty satisfactorily, the question of appointing an additional number might then be properly considered. He certainly should not think of doing anything more for these gentlemen, who received salaries, and gave nothing in return.

said, the hon. and learned Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon) had described his answer as being of a cavalier character. For his part, he did not know what was the definition of the word; but he supposed the hon. Member meant that he had declined to commit himself to any opinion until he had had the opportunity of becoming personally acquainted with the details to which reference had been made in the course of the discussion. He had assured the Committee that he would make himself personally acquainted with the working of the Department, and he hoped to have an early opportunity of doing so. But as to a general inquiry, he did not wish to be understood as holding out a prospect of anything of the kind. He would make a personal inquiry, but beyond that he could not go.

said, great good had been obtained from the inquiry, held last year, into the management of the Board of Works in Ireland; and he believed that good also would be obtained by an inquiry being instituted into the working of the Local Government Board in Ireland. Unless the Committee were prepared to put off for a whole year the benefits which would be derived from such inquiry, the Vote ought to be postponed; but if the Vote were passed, they were not likely to get the desired inquiry until that time next year, when the question would again come before the Committee. A whole year would thus be lost. With reference to the microscopical examination of lymph upon which the President of the Local Government Board relied for the purposes of insuring the purity of the matter supplied from that Office, it was a well-known fact amongst scientific men that no amount of microscopical examination was sufficient to insure that lymph was free from disease—in truth, no examination of whatever kind could guarantee that result. The only way in which they could insure that lymph was not diseased was by knowing all the people from whom the matter had come, or by tracing it to the original source of supply. The lymph was taken, in the first instance, from the calf, and if they knew it passed through no impure channel afterwards, then they might conclude that it was not contaminated. There was no other way that he was aware of for insuring the purity of vaccine matter.

expressed his determination to support the Amendment, unless, upon the appeal of Irish Members, the Government held out some hope of clearing up this matter.

thought the hon. and learned Member for Louth (Mr. Sullivan) had misunderstood what he wished to convey. What he wished to convey to the Committee was that, as President of the Local Government Board in Ireland, he had never yet had an opportunity of making himself personally acquainted with the individuals whose conduct of the Department had been impugned; and that he hoped, before long, to investigate the matter personally. Considering the state of Public Business in the House, it was hardly necessary for him to say that he could not hope to make that inquiry at present. He could not see his way to making a journey over to Ireland until the termination of the Session. If the Vote were postponed, of course the whole of the Medical Service would come to an end for the year, which result, he presumed, hon. Members opposite did not desire. The hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Bell) had said until this matter was cleared up he should be bound to oppose the Vote. He thought, however, the hon. Gentleman would agree with him that the Government would not be justified in consenting to a general inquiry until he (Mr. Lowther) had had an opportunity of personally acquainting himself with the matter. He hoped, therefore, the Committee would not insist upon the proposed inquiry.

called especial attention to the answer just given, as showing the inconvenience of putting the whole of the State Offices connected with Ireland upon the shoulders of one man. He regretted that the challenge thrown out by the hon. Member on the Bench behind him (Mr. Gray), with reference to the Local Government Board in Ireland, was not to be accepted by the Government. From what he himself knew of the officers of the Local Government Board, he did not think they would object to such an inquiry being instituted as that which the hon. Member (Mr. Gray) had suggested. There might be defects in the operations of such a Department, for it was one difficult to work. It constantly came into collision with local authorities all over the country; but, on the whole, its work was generally good, and, consequently, would bear investigation. When the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. Lowther) did not pretend to know the details of the office sufficiently to enable him to deny the charge which had been made with regard to the working of the Department, it was really due, not only to the Local Government Board itself, but to the Government and Administration in Ireland, that an inquiry should take place.

said, this matter had assumed a somewhat serious aspect. He had no fault to find with the administration of the Poor Law by the Local Government Board in Ireland; but he did maintain that they failed in the administration of the new duties cast upon them by the Sanitary Acts. One of the Commissioners, the Hon. Mr. Bellew, never did anything. The Medical Commissioner, Mr. King, devoted no attention to the stimulating of sanitary authorities to action. The Local Government Board in Ireland was in the wrong in not constantly issuing Circulars, model bye-laws, advice, and suggestions of all kinds, which had the most beneficial effect in England. He had to get such information at the Local Government Board in London as could not be obtained in Ireland. The right hon. Baronet the present Secretary of State for the Colonies, and formerly Chief Secretary for Ireland (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), would remember a discussion which took place on this subject last year, when pressure was put upon the Government to consent to an inquiry as to the constitution and management of the Board of Works in Ireland, and also as to the Local Government Board in that country. He could not say that any distinct promise was made; but his recollection led him to believe that something in the shape of a hope was held out that the investigation should take place, and if any necessity for reform was shown, there should be a full and complete inquiry as to all branches of the subject. He would also remind the House—and in this he was also in the recollection of the right hon. Baronet—that in the Committee of which he was Chairman, the Secretary of the Irish Board was called, and was unable to give any information, so that it became necessary to call English witnesses to explain the meaning and working of the Irish Act.

thought it was not possible profitably to discuss so important an Amendment at that late hour—1.20 A.M.—and, therefore, he moved to report Progress. In doing so, he must express surprise that the Government would not assent to the appointment of a Departmental Committee to inquire into and report upon matters of so great importance as those involved in the Vote before the Committee.

said, it was perfectly true that he was Chairman of the Committee which inquired last year into the working of the Irish Sanitary Acts, and he remembered that the Secretary of the Irish Local Government Board was summoned as a witness; but it was not from any inability on his part to give information that, after being in attendance for two or three days, the gentleman returned to Ireland. It was necessary that he should return, in order to attend to certain departmental work requiring his personal supervision. With regard to the members of the Local Government Board, he had had frequent personal communication, during his tenure of Office in Ireland, with Sir Alfred Power, and felt bound to say that he was one of the best, if not the best, officials in the service of the Irish Executive. It had been stated, broadly, in the course of the discussion, that Mr. Bellew did no work; but he should like to know what proof the hon. Member for Tipperary (Mr. Gray) had for that assertion? No doubt, the members of the Board divided the work between themselves in the most convenient manner; but he believed it to be equally true that Mr. Bellew took a share of the work in his own De- partment, and discharged it in an efficient manner. The same remark applied, as far as his own observation had enabled him to form an opinion, to the other members of the Department. Since the Act of 1874 was passed, he had no hesitation in saying that the Irish Local Government Board had done all that was possible to spread a knowledge of sanitary law among the local authorities who had to administer it, and had themselves discharged thoroughly all the duties which the Act imposed upon them.

repeated, that he was perfectly accurate in saying that the Secretary to the Irish Board was not able to give information to the Committee, and appealed to hon. Members of the House who were also Members of the Committee for confirmation of his statement.

said, that in his opinion the gentleman was in a position of literally knowing nothing of the subjects in reference to which questions were put to him. In short, he might say that he had never met a more incompetent man. He could say nothing as to why the gentleman left the Committee; but he could say with confidence that he could give no information of the least value on the points which were put to him in the course of his examination.

said, his recollection was perfectly clear upon one point—namely, that the hon. Member for Cavan, who had made these sweeping charges against Mr. Banks, was not present at more than two or three sittings of the Committee, which sat at least a dozen times.

hoped that after the statement of the right hon. Baronet, the Amendment would be withdrawn.

, who thought it was time for the Committee to adjourn, moved that the Chairman leave the Chair. A great deal of Business had been got through, and he thought the Government ought to be pleased with that fact and assent to his Motion.

said, as there had been considerable discussion on this subject, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would allow the Vote to be taken, and the three others which were immediately to follow. There was, he understood, a general desire on the part of Irish Members that Class II. should be disposed of that night. Of course, if it was not the wish of Irish Members generally now to proceed, he would not press the Votes on. He hoped, however, that the Amendment would be withdrawn.

did not see what would be gained by postponing this question. It had been discussed, and he saw no reason why the Committee should not at once come to a final decision upon it. He hoped his hon. Friend (Mr. O'Sullivan) would withdraw his Motion.

had no objection to the passing of several of these Votes, provided that the Government would make the promise that the time occupied with the discussion of them would be taken from that wretched Sunday Closing Bill. He would not, by his own consent, allow the Government to get one penny until they had abandoned the principle which they had, up to that moment, adopted of giving every description of indulgence to those people who wished to make themselves Irish Home Rule coercionists.

urged the hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Sullivan) to withdraw his Motion.

said, as it was the general wish of his hon. Friends, he would no longer stand in the way.

expressed his intention not to divide the House on the present occasion. He hoped the Chief Secretary for Ireland would see reason to change his mind, and would grant the inquiry which had been asked for. Unless his own views changed considerably on this subject, he should consider it to be his imperative duty to press this question more strongly upon the Committee next Session. He hoped that the Govern- ment would consider the question between this and next year.

, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its object was to enable tenants holding property belonging to the disestablished Irish Church who were not in a position to buy the properties out-and-out to get possession of them by means of leases in perpetuity. If a right of the kind was not given to the tenants, there was a probability of the properties being bought up by land-jobbers, who would, probably, not prove very good landlords; and good tenants who had lived on the properties for many years would fall into bad hands and suffer very unjustly in consequence. The view which he held had been supported by one of the Judges of the Landed Estates Court, who was examined before a Committee on this subject, and as no injury would be done to the property of the Irish Church in relation to the question of value, he hoped the House would assent to the second reading of the Bill. He might remark that the Bill was not compulsory, but permissive.

opposed the Motion, on the ground that the Bill involved a most vicious principle. It was true that the Irish Land Act contemplated the possibility of the tenants purchasing their holdings; but it was never intended that they should obtain possession of them by means of perpetuity leases, than which he could scarcely imagine a worse or more mischievous system for the tenure of land. The question had, time after time, been brought before the attention of Parliament, and nothing but condemnation had been heaped upon it. The system which was proposed would not constitute the purchasers of property sold subject to these proposed leases owners of the soil; they would be mere rent-chargers, with not the slightest obligation upon them to improve the lands of which they had become the nominal owners; but which would, for all practical purposes, be owned by the lessees. He begged to move that the Bill be read a second time that day three months.

said, he could not understand the objection of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to the present Bill. Of course, a man who purchased land which was let on a perpetuity lease would not be in the position of an ordinary absolute owner; but he would have a very good security for the interest of the money which he had expended in the purchase; and the Church Commissioners would be perfectly justified in entering upon transactions of the kind, for he did not anticipate that they would part with the lands at any loss. They would not, in fact, part with the properties in any case at anything short of their full value. They would get increased rents from the tenants in consideration of the perpetuity leases, and these rents could be sold at a very fair rate. The evidence, which was given before the Committee, supported the views of the hon. Member who had charge of the Bill, and he believed that the measure would have the effect of carrying into effect the intention of the Legislature when it passed the Irish Church Act—namely, that tenants who had not sufficient money to buy their holdings out-and-out, should not be handed over to the tender mercies of the worst class of landlords.

said, the species of tenure contemplated by the Bill, and to which the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary so strongly objected, was a common one in Ireland, and had been found to work satisfactorily in most cases. His hon. Friend the Member for Roscommon, in referring to the evidence given before the Select Committee, omitted to say that the then Attorney General for Ireland, who represented the Government, made a Report, in which he recommended as nearly as possible that which was proposed in the present Bill, but which was repudiated by the present Chief Secretary. The hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Plunket) made a Report in which there was a distinct recommendation that the Land Act of 1870 should be so amended as to give the Judges of the Landed Estates Court power to give leases in perpetuity to the tenants, instead of selling to them out-and-out. It had been admitted by the Chief Secretary for Ireland that the Church Commissioners had been doing very well. If that was so, why should not discretion be given to them, as was proposed by this Bill? He thought the argument of the Chief Secretary was disposed of by the fact that the Bill gave discretion to the Commissioners; and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not press his opposition to the measure.

wished to refer to one point which had not been touched by the Chief Secretary for Ireland—namely, that the Government would be secure in advancing money, and any proprietor would be secure in purchasing land if leases in perpetuity were granted; because the purchaser who bought such a lease would have the goodwill of the tenant for his security, while the tenant would not forfeit his perpetuity lease, so that a very good purchase would give place to a very bad one. All the practical men that had given evidence—Judges of the Landed Estates Courts and others—strongly recommended that this power should be given. The general wish of the people in Ireland was that there should be a more settled state of affairs, which they believed would be secured by this Bill giving to a larger number of people a strong local interest either as owners or holders of long leases. The measure was a moderate one. The Chief Secretary had said, with, all the authority of the Cabinet behind him, that the Government would not allow a thousand tenants to have the security which this Bill proposed to give them. The Government, in endorsing that statement, would be taking a strong step for themselves, in resisting a moderate measure which would involve loss neither to the public nor to any individual.

did not know whether the Chief Secretary for Ireland had been in communication with the Church Commissioners with regard to this Bill. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would be kind enough to intimate whether he had communicated with them or not; because, if he had not, it would be a great advantage for him to ascertain their opinion upon this subject before finally disposing of the Bill this Session. This was an important matter, since it concerned the welfare of about 1,000 poor tenants in Ireland. If the Bill were rejected, it would be the last attempt made to obtain some sort of fair treatment for them; for the land in question would be sold in the Landed Estates Court, in all probability to small land-jobbers, who made the worst class of landlords. He did not think the Chief Secretary was aware of the fate to which he was about to consign these tenants, or else he would not have dismissed so summarily this valuable Bill. It did not put the Commissioners in any worse position than that which they occupied at present; in fact, it put them in a much better position. The Bill was only permissive in its character. It did not compel, as the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. Lowther) seemed to suppose, the Commissioners to do anything. It merely proposed to give them permission, if they thought desirable, to give perpetuity leases. If the right hon. Gentleman had not taken the opinion of the Church Commissioners as to the desirability of this Bill becoming law, it was hoped that he would agree to do so; and that he would accordingly allow the debate to be adjourned until he got their views upon the subject, and had time to consider them.

complained of the treatment which the Bill had received at the hands of the Government. It simply amounted to this. At the instigation of their Irish supporters on the Ministerial side, they declared their full determination, under no circumstances, to have any peasant proprietors in Ireland. This appeal to the Government, that they would pass the Bill, was probably the last which would be made during the present Session. The request was made, not at the cost of a single proprietary right, or of a single sentiment as to property; but it was an attempt made to get out of the land which belonged to the Church of Ireland something like a proprietary right for the peasantry. If the Church had continued in possession of the land, it would have been better for the tenants; because, although they enjoyed only temporary holdings, and might have to pay increased rents according to the increased value of their holdings, still they would not be subject to the treatment which, in the present state of legislation, they would probably receive at the hands of the paltry land-jobbers, when the latter had obtained possession of the property. These landowners would not rise to the dignity even of that class described by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. Lowther) the other evening as "carpet-bag" proprietors and purchasers of land, if this modest and moderate measure were rejected by the House. If its rejection did not serve a single aristocratical or feudal sentiment lurking in the breasts of hon. Gentlemen from Ireland who sat on the opposite side, at any rate it would offer a distinct encouragement to the Irish peasantry to fill their minds with the idea that the House of Commons was determined not to comply with their just demand for fixity of tenure.

did not think the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. Lowther) required any "nods and winks" from hon. Members behind him with regard to this Bill; because, with a candour which was quite refreshing, the right hon. Gentleman had the other evening told the House that he detested this Land Act, and that it was passed against his most energetic, not to say obstructive, resistance. That was surely an unpleasant position for the right hon. Gentleman to be placed in. It was as if they had asked Mr. Jefferson Davis, of America, to put in force the Act for the emancipation of slaves.

observed, that this Bill, which had been described in the course of the discussion as a revolutionary measure, was practically recommended by the hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Plunket), who in his Report had recommmended that, in case of sales in the Landed Estates Court, the Judges should have power to sanction fee farm grants to tenants in perpetuity. The clause containing that recommendation had been passed by the unanimous vote of the Select Committee. There was not a single dissentient; and that proposal was founded mainly upon the evidence of Judge Flanagan. In bringing forward this Bill, he did not for a moment propose that the Church Commissioners should lose money by it; for it was merely a permissive measure. They could undertake, or decline to undertake, any transaction, according as they thought fit. Perpetuity leases were well known in Ireland, and there was a good market for them. There was a provision in the Irish Church Act that perpetuity leases should be sold at not less than 25 years' purchase. That showed there was a good market in Ireland for such leases, and a good price was obtained for them. Therefore, no loss would accrue to the Church Commissioners; and it was an entire illusion for the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to suggest anything of the kind. The suggestion of loss only showed that the right hon. Gentleman had never consulted the Commissioners, or his own Attorney General, who entertained an opinion altogether contrary from that which had been expressed by the right hon. Gentleman himself. The Chief Secretary for Ireland, without having looked into the Report on this subject, without having consulted the hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Plunket), and relying only on his English knowledge of perpetuity leases, which stood in a different position from those in Ireland, now asked the House to reject this Bill; although it was true that perpetuity leases had a good market in Ireland, and that the evidence before the Committee was strongly in favour of passing the measure which the House was now asked to read a second time. Indeed, so strong was that evidence, that he had lost no time, as Chairman of the Committee, in bringing the Bill before the House. If it were rejected, a grave injustice would be done to the tenants concerned.

said, this was not a Party question, but a question between a poor class of tenants and speculators in land. He, therefore, appealed to hon. Gentlemen on the other side to reflect before giving a vote which would place this land in the hands of those speculators, who would probably turn away the tenants from their holdings. Nothing would be lost by passing the Bill. It would give the tenants an opportunity of buying their holdings; and, therefore, he hoped the House would read the Bill a second time.

said, that a few nights back the Chief Secretary for Ireland objected very much to an inquiry into the operation of the Irish Land Act, and referred to landlords like Mr. Buckley as "carpet-baggers." The class of people into whose hands land in Ireland would fall under the system which it was proposed to put an end to by this Bill were not even entitled to the appellation which he had quoted—they were mere landsharks, from whose jaws it was wished to snatch the poorest, but by no means the least deserving, of the class of Irish tenants.

said, it was inaccurate to state that land owned, subject to a perpetual lease, was worth as much as other freehold, and that, therefore, the Irish Church would not suffer by the operation of the Bill; because it stood to reason that no man would pay so high a price for that which he could not sell readily again, as for that which became unconditionally his absolute property. As a proof of this, he stated that the firm to which he belonged had owned property in the city of Cork, subject to a perpetual lease, for nearly 100 years, and owing to this circumstance had never been able to get any acceptable offer for it.

hoped the Motion to adjourn the debate, which he begged to make, would be agreed to, because it was clear that the Chief Secretary for Ireland had not yet had an opportunity of consulting the Irish Church Commissioners on the subject: it was equally clear that the late Solicitor General for Ireland was in favour of the principle of the Bill, and that if it were not settled at once, the chances of the tenants would be gone for ever.

, in seconding the Motion, said, he had acted as solicitor for tenants holding under the Irish Church Commissioners; and though some of them could not command sufficient capital to buy their holdings out and out, they were not, therefore, to be despised, and ought to be fairly treated by the Government, so that they might get their property on the payment of a fee farm rent, which most of them would be able to accomplish. The Church Commissioners had in many cases got much higher prices for their land than were obtainable by ordinary vendors in the Landed Estates Court; and, therefore, he thought they should be prepared to make some concession to such of their tenants as wished to get their holdings on leases in perpetuity.

said, it was impossible at that late period of the sitting (2.25 a.m.) to contend against a Motion of the kind that had been made.

said, he would prefer to take a division upon the Main Question.

said, under the circumstances, he would ask leave to withdraw the Motion.

hoped the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not shut the door in the face of the tenants, but would consent to refer the matter for inquiry to the Church Commissioners. Only the other day he was asked by one of the tenants to whom this question referred to buy his farm in order to prevent its falling into the hands of one of these land-jobbers, who would increase his rent to an exorbitant amount, or turn him out of his holding.