moved—

"That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they do insert provisions for the purpose of making it compulsory that the surface water be carried away from under and around the site of every dwelling-house and other building."

His object, he said, was to protect householders against unscrupulous builders. As matters stood at present, it was quite competent for any unscrupulous person to take a quantity of swampy land and build a number of houses upon it with utter disregard to the safety or comfort of the occupiers. The district surveyors could not be entirely trusted to, as he was afraid they were inclined to wink at the bad work of builders.

seconded the Motion.

Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they do insert provisions for the purpose of making it compulsory that the surface water be carried away from under and around the site of every dwelling-house and other building."—( Mr. Weir. )

said, he hoped the House would not accept this mandatory Resolution. It would mean the laying upon the Committee of very considerable labour. The Committee had already sat for many days considering the Bill, which consolidated and amended a large number of Statutes, and they hoped by heroic exertions to finish it to-morrow. But the hon. Member's proposal would overload the measure, and would lay upon a Committee which had already done a great deal of useful work a labour which it could not possibly be expected to discharge.

said, he did not at that moment intend to go into the merits of the point raised, but he would point out that the present Bill was already extremely heavy, and to further weight it as proposed by the introduction of this large question would probably mean the loss of it. The Committee had expended a great amount of labour on the Bill, and the investigation was just drawing to a conclusion. He, therefore, on behalf of the London County Council, opposed the Instruction.

said, he also would appeal to his hon. Friend to withdraw his Motion. He certainly could not support the proposal to re-commit the Bill. While convinced of the necessity for better drainage in connection with London buildings, he thought the question should be raised in connection with a Public Health Bill. If the hon. Member for Ross-shire, who was a Member of the London County Council, had been on the alert when the Bill was before that body, he might have been able to attain the object he had in view. He hoped the course of the present Bill would not be interfered with by the adoption of the Instruction.

thought that if the Bill was at all overloaded it was due to the introduction of fresh matters in Committee. His experience of 31 years in London administration told him that building Bills were the proper place in which to deal with these matters. He was aware that in London in the past there had been a great neglect of these very important questions, with the result that many unhealthy houses had been erected, and he was sorry, therefore, the London County Council opposed this Instruction.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 15; Noes 95.—(Division List, No. 150.)

said, that complaint had very often been made with regard to the misleading advertisements which the Secretary for War (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) allowed to appear in country and other newspapers. Last year he had to complain of the advertisements appearing in The Staffordshire Advertiser with regard to the food and clothing of the men, and it was then admitted that those advertisements were of a most misleading character. Another advertisement now appeared in that paper which was almost as misleading, and he thought a protest ought to be raised against anything being put into local newspapers which was not absolutely fair, and which did not disclose everything that ought to be disclosed. The advertisement he referred to was headed "Employment for those out of work," and went on to say, "good food, good clothes, good lodgings, and money to spend every day." He was only going to comment upon one of those misleading statements, that, namely, with regard to good clothes; the others he must reserve for other Votes. He asked would not any man of the recruit class reading statements of this kind suppose that the War Office was going to clothe him? As a matter of fact, all that happened was that the recruit got a free kit. He got what were called his public clothes, whilst he practically had to buy necessaries for himself. When he enlisted he received two flannel shirts and three pairs of socks. Of course, in taking these articles he supposed that after a decent interval he would get a fresh supply, but no—if the man remained in the Army for 40 years he got no more. This advertisement would be called a false prospectus if it were issued by a company. He thought the Secretary for War was fully entitled to praise for the action he had taken with regard to the issue of clothing in other respects. As far as he was able to make out, the right hon. Gentleman in the first place gave the private soldier his outfit on enlistment, which was in itself a great gain. Before the present Regulation came into force if the recruit joined at any but one particular period of the year he received worn-out clothing which had been used by somebody else. The fine clothes of the soldier were frequently an inducement to a man to join the Army, and when such a man found that he had to wait for some months before he got his ordinary kit he was terribly disgusted. He (Mr. Hanbury) thought the right hon. Gentleman was certainly entitled to praise for having made this distinction. Then the right hon. Gentleman gave compensation for articles not worn out by a given time. Of course, under the old system there was no inducement to thrift with regard to clothing. Now if at the end of the period for which a man's clothes had to last the clothes were in a condition to last for three mouths longer their value was put down to the man's benefit, and the money was only drawn out as new clothes were required. This was, of course, a great inducement to soldiers to make their clothes last as long as possible, and it also had the indirect effect of punishing men who were not careful with their clothes. Then also men had been given the power of selling a certain portion of their clothing. On this point he (Mr. Hanbury) did not think the soldier was quite fairly treated, because if his clothes were not sold when they were put up to auction he was bound to sell them at what were called contractors' prices. If those prices were anything like good prices there would be no objection to raise, but he was afraid that the system against which he had had to protest year after year was still in existence, under which the disused clothing of the troops was sold for three years in advance, although some of it had not even been made at the time of the sale. The whole of this disused clothing was put into one lot and offered to certain contractors. There were 350 kinds of articles comprised in the lot; and, to show what an enormous purchase it meant, he might say that there were 420,000 pairs of trousers alone in it. Of course, the purchase was a sheer speculation. A Jew bought these things not knowing what he was buying, and the result was that he gave a ridiculous price for them. He (Mr. Hanbury) did not see why the clothes should not be put up to auction after they had been used instead of before some of them were made. One change that had been made by the Secretary for War seemed so ridiculous that perhaps the construction he put upon the Regulations was wrong. Under the old system a soldier who was discharged had a set of clothes given to him, whilst now he was to have the magnificent present of 5s. instead. He should think there were few places where a soldier would be able to get a suit of clothes for 5s. The non-commissioned officer's suit was 7s. 6d., and the warrant officer's 15s. Recruits had a great deal of extra work to do during their first year, and he did not think the Government properly clothed them. This affected the English Vote; but he should like to ask what had been done in regard to Indian clothing. Under the old system when a soldier reached India he (Mr. Hanbury) fancied he had to buy the whole of the Indian clothing for himself. That, of course, was a great hardship. The soldier had been relieved of the cost of his sea-kit, and he did not know why he should not also be relieved of the cost of his outfit for India. As to the Indian clothing he (Mr. Hanbury) was afraid that the supply of cloth clothing to the soldier in India was too large. The man only wore it a dozen or 20 times in the course of a year. Great economy might be effected in not issuing so much cloth clothing in India. Each issue might be made to last longer.

said, this subject did not arise under the Vote.

said, the clothes he was referring to came out of the Pimlico stores.

But not out of our Estimates.

said, the inspection of them was paid for under this Vote. It should be recollected that one of his complaints was that a great deal of receiving and inspecting work was done at Pimlico at the cost of the War Office for other Departments. It was done under a Treasury Minute, which said the War Office was not to charge the various Departments for the work so done. He did not know whether India came under that Minute, but the Post Office and Telegraph Departments did, and the Irish Constabulary, the Customs House, the Board of Trade, the Convict Service, the Prisons Board, the Office of Works, and the Royal Courts of Justice. The work was done for these Departments under the Army Vote without a penny of repayment coming from them. He was rather inclined to say, in spite of the Treasury Minute, that these War Office Estimates ought to be for War Office purposes alone. Probably they spent quite enough on the Army, but they did not get enough for their money, and they ought to be careful that they did not spend money intended for the Army for the benefit of other Departments. There was another point he desired to deal with. Under the old system all the clothing for the Infantry was made up at Pimlico in assorted sizes, then sent down to the different battalions, and after a great deal of trouble in cutting and stitching, made to fit the man. That had always struck him as being a rather expensive process, and, besides that, the men were not as proud as of their dress as they would be if they were properly fitted. A different system had prevailed in the cavalry regiments. In their case a certain amount of cloth was sent down and they made it up themselves. In these days, when there were so many married women attached to regiments, he wondered why something was not done to find them employment in connection with the clothing of the Army. He objected to centralisation at Pimlico, and he did so in the interests of these women. There was no such centralised system in Germany, the whole of the clothing being done by the regiments themselves to be made up. He did not propose to revert to the system of clothing colonels, but he could not say—having seen a great many German soldiers—that our men were smarter looking or better dressed than those of Germany, or that their clothing was better fitted or more serviceable for a campaign. Still, there was no comparison between the cost of uniforms in Germany and England. According to the figures laid before the Committee which had inquired into the Estimates—and he should like to see another such Committee appointed, for such a great deal of valuable information had been gathered at that inquiry leading to such repeated changes, and to so many useful reforms, that the report was by this time almost obsolete—an English cavalry uniform cost £4 17s. 11d. and a German £2 18s.; an English infantry uniform £3 3s. 8d. and a German £2 10s. 8d. The cost of the German uniforms was less than that of the English by £2 and £1 respectively. That, he thought, showed that we were spending too much on dress at the present moment. Yesterday the hon. Member for Bristol had talked about the positive danger there would be in time of war in a broad distinction between the dress of our Regular Forces and Volunteers. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had used the argument of expense in opposition to the proposal to alter the existing state of things, and had pointed out that the Volunteers had refused to change their uniform at the time that the territorial system was adopted. But that argument did not apply to the distinction made between the uniform of our officers and private soldiers. He was told that in the field British officers, particularly staff officers, were a clear mark for the enemy because their dress, even down to that of the humblest subaltern, was so distinguishable from the dress of the men. It might be possible, he should think, to have some dress to distinguish on their own side the officers from the men, but not so distinguishable as a mark for the bullet of the enemy. And this led to a further question. He should like to know whether, in view of the different conditions under which battles would be fought in future, owing to the long range of the new rifle, the question had been thoroughly gone into in order to see whether red was the best colour for the uniform of the British Army? Personally, he was inclined to think that it was, so far as he had discussed the question with people who had studied it; still, he did notice that in the Service newspapers a strong impression prevailed that, in view of the long range of the present rifle, red for the uniforms was too conspicuous a colour. Sir William Butler, for example, writing in The United Service Magazine only a few months ago, spoke strongly against the red of the British uniform, saying that it was so easily distinguishable at a considerable distance; and scientific men with whom he had discussed the subject said that at a distance it was not the best colour, though it was better than dark blue or green. As to red being the best colour for comfort considering the variety of climates in which the British soldier had to fight, he was told what was contrary to the general opinion—namely, that in cold weather white was the coolest thing one could wear. That did not seem to be the opinion of the hon. Member for King's Lynn (Mr. Gibson Bowles), who sat beside him occasionally and was fond of wearing white in summer. His (Mr. Hanbury's) information was that dark clothing was the coolest in summer. Red would appear to be the happy mean between white and black, so that there was nothing on the whole better for the British troops or more adaptable to the various climates in which they had to fight. No doubt the War Office had gone thoroughly into the subject, and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would assure the Committee that red was the nearest colour approaching to invisibility at a long distance they could get, as well as the most suitable for the various climates in which our soldiers had to live. Another subject to which he wished to direct attention was that of sweating. The House of Lords Committee had reported on the gross amount of sweating that prevailed in making uniforms and shirts, especially in Pimlico. This subject needed to be watched. He was told that the old system of sweating was reviving, especially in the manufacture of soldiers' shirts. Ordinary Service shirts were paid for at the rate of 7½d., and it took a skilled needlewoman eight or nine hours to make it, and a soldier's widow could make six shirts a week by dint of application. He mentioned this particular case because he had got evidence on the point. There was no doubt that the evil did exist as to the making of shirts. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had an idea that sometimes he (Mr. Hanbury) was a little too much inclined to find fault with the War Office, but all the statements he made here were founded on the Report of some Committee. The facts were not capable of being denied. The Report of the Lords Committee showed that the sweating that went on in connection with the manufacture of soldiers' clothing was a disgrace to the War Office itself. He asked that the Secretary for War would steadily keep his eye on this matter, and on the Director of Contracts, to see that the contracts given out outside Pimlico were given on such fair terms that those who took them would be able to make a decent thing out of them.

said, he should like to know whether any of the material from which soldiers' and non-commissioned officers' shirts were made was sent out, under any circumstances, to civilians, or whether it was all given to soldiers' wives—or, at all events, whether the choice of that work was first given to soldiers' wives? He asked the question for the reason that recently he had heard complaints in connection with the Home District Association for providing work for soldiers' wives to the effect that there had not been a sufficient amount of work obtained from Pimlico. He was not aware whether or not that was really the case.

said, that in the valuable remarks of the hon. Member for Preston there was nothing which appeared to him to have more weight than the fact that at the present time the officers and men in Her Majesty's Army were so dissimiliarly clothed. There were such arms of precision nowadays that officers wearing a dress which easily distinguished them from the men could be easily picked off by an enemy's sharp-shooters. He found when on a visit to the West Indies two or three years ago that the soldiers there were clothed in what was called a Zouave uniform, whereas the officers were dressed in the uniform of the Line. Officers in such circumstances would become easy marks for the enemy's bullets. Why was it not possible to have a universal uniform in the British Army—one in which men could be sent out immediately on active service? No doubt for reviews, and so forth, it was desirable to have a red coat; but to the mind of every expert in colours, it was doubtful whether reel was the best uniform for active service, especially in India and similar climates. On looking through the Estimates he was struck by the fact that whereas in 1894–5 the material for clothing cost £212,000, in 1893–4 it was £286,000 or a larger amount by £73,000. But he found that the amount spent on ready-made clothing in 1894–5 was £445,520, whereas in 1893–4 it was only £388,000 or more by £57,000. He certainly thought that the observations of the hon. Member for Preston ought to have some weight. Why was there this decrease in the amount of material made up at Pimlico and elsewhere, and why this increase in expenditure on clothing bought ready-made? This ready-made clothing was obtained through sub-contractors, and probably the War Office took no cognizance of the fact as to whether the articles were manufactured in England, in Germany, or elsewhere. He did not suppose there was single article marked "manufactured in England." He thought we ought to adopt the Prussian system of dressing all our soldiers of the Line alike, or nearly so.

said, the argument of the Secretary for War was mostly lack of money when pressure was put upon him to adopt reforms. If, however, Parliament had accepted that argument, the Army would have been left in statu quo a long time ago. Our soldiers should certainly be allowed a free kit; and if largely-increased expenditure was thus occasioned, the money required should be saved on other Votes. Important details of this kind ought not to be neglected. He could not help thinking that the recruit was hardly treated. The lad had constant drills and fatigue duty, and ought to be served with a fatigue dress of brown holland or something of that sort, such as they found in foreign barracks for such work as coal carrying and fatigue duty. He hoped the Secretary of State would not listen to any proposal to change the colour of the uniform. But the public and the Army would, he believed, regret any such change.

I said red was the best.

said, he was aware of that, but the hon. Member also said that he hail noticed letters in various Service papers saying that there was a difference of opinion on the subject. In regard to distinguishing officers by their uniform, he did not think it would be possible to disguise the officer in such a way that, to the enemy's marksmen, he would be undistinguishable from his men. There must always be some distinguishing mark upon him. If they stripped the General Officer of his gold lace and sash, he would still have his cocked hat. ["No, no!"] But something, no doubt, might be done to make the dress more simple. With regard to the employment of soldiers' wives in connection with the stores at Pimlico and elsewhere, there was no doubt that those who were married with leave were hard put to it to make a living, but the straits the women were put to who were married without leave and the misery they had to endure was appalling, especially in towns like London. But for the regimental assistance sometimes given out to them they would frequently be left to starve. He should like to hear that there was a prospect of more work being given to these women from Pimlico. Another thing he should like to hear about was as to the reserve of clothing which he spoke of last year in connection with the Estimates. He believed that the reserve of clothing at Pimlico was totally inadequate, and that on this account the Reserves, if called out, would be perfectly useless. Furthermore, he questioned the propriety of keeping the whole of the stores at Pimlico. It was doubtful whether, in the case of rapid mobilisation, the whole of the stores could be got out of the doors of the central depôt and despatched to the various colonels without confusion and mistake. He should like to know whether, in the case of the reserve clothing at Pimlico, it was properly labelled and all means were taken to secure its immediate delivery, without mistake, to the various stations for which it was destined? If this was not the case, and if any fault arose, probably the whole system would break down at once.

said, he had been requested to bring forward the question of sweating at the Pimlico Factory, which had been touched on by the hon. Member for Preston. The Secretary of State for War shook his head, but surely the right hon. Gentleman knew that there had been such charges made. There was a very widespread opinion abroad that such irregularities had occurred, and that opinion was founded not upon fancy, but upon the Report of the Lords' Committee which sat two years ago, and unless something radical had since been done the nation was open to the grave charge of setting an example in sweating which had been universally condemned. What did the Report say? Here was a statement from the Director of Army Contracts—

"The evidence given before your Lordships has tended to show that our Army contracts have been used for some years as a vehicle for sweating, and that the whole of the sweating business has been carried out almost under the protection of the War Office."

The Committee added—

"Great irregularities have occurred in the furnishing of Government contracts. That is open to no doubt, and the Committee is strongly of opinion that greater vigilance should be exercised over the placing of contracts."

Though the right hon. Gentleman opposite seemed to dissent, there was no doubt that great irregularities had occurred. If anything had lately been done to prevent irregularities, he (Mr. Freeman-Mitford) apologised for bringing the matter forward.

said, that his gesture of dissent only had reference to sweating in the Army Clothing Establishment at Pimlico. The accusations of sweating had reference not to the Government factory, but to War Office contracts executed outside.

said, that no doubt the way he had worded his remarks left them open to misconstruction. He was alluding to what took place in connection with contracts placed out. He was certain, however, from the kindly spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman had received his remarks, that the War Office would not close its eyes to a matter which the public thought reflected very great discredit upon the country.

said, the troops at Aden, which formed part of the Bombay command, considered it a great grievance that they only received European pay while, owing to the climate, they had to provide themselves with tropical clothing. He had not been at Aden now for two years, but when he was there this was a very serious grievance.

said, the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War did not dispute that a certain amount of sweating had existed in the outside districts.

No; I said that the Committee stated that.

said, it was not for him to question the statement of the Committee. If the right hon. Gentleman did it it was another matter. But the fact that sweating took place in connection with contract-made clothing did not prevent the right hon. Gentleman and his advisers from increasing the amount of such clothing used in the Army. He (Mr. Bowles) found that, whereas clothing to the value of £293,000 was supplied at Pimlico, the value of the ready-made clothing supplied was £445,000. The latter was as four to three. He thought the moment had arrived when the whole theory of Army clothing ought to be reconsidered. The clothes of the Army were made upon traditions inherited from Frederick the Great and from Germany. The hard, stiff, regimental model was followed. The black stock, it was true, had disappeared, but the German theory of clothing, which began with the stiff pasteboard cap, intended to make a man look two feet more than he was, was still adhered to. This stiff, hard, tight clothing—this traditional military clothing—should be overhauled and the advice and experience of men who had served on the field should be taken as to the best and most useful uniform. They should have a loose uniform. It had always been said that they could not get recruits unless they made the clothing extremely ornamental—in fact, that they must clothe the troops not for the enemy, but for the servant-girl. ["No, no!"] Yes; that was the argument—unless they had the uniform extremely ornamental, and the pride of the servant-girls, who were the soldier's public, and the only critics whose opinions he valued, they would not get recruits. The average cost of the British uniform of all classes, as he worked it out, was £4 10s. 7½d. The cost of the Life Guards' dress was £7 4s., whilst that of the West Indian regiments was only £2 10s. No doubt the Life Guards ought to be magnificent. They were intended for display—["No, no!"]—and not work. But so far as the other regiments were concerned, the prices for this ornamental uniform varied considerably, and he contended that for a very much less figure than they were paying now they could get sufficient ornamentation and a very much better article for the purposes which a uniform had to serve. His belief was that if they had the best uniforms for actual service they would look handsomer than the merely ornamental uniforms for parade. The result of having this enormously ornamented uniform was that when men went on active service it had to be discarded and another uniform adopted. Why should they have one uniform for the servant-maid and another for the enemy? It seemed to him that one uniform ought to suffice, and it might be ornamented in such a way as to be suitable for parade purposes, and even to satisfy the aspirations of the servant-maids. That was the system that prevailed in the Navy, and the cost of the naval uniform was as nothing compared with the lowest of the military uniforms. One reason for that was that the sailors made their own clothes, and he did not see why the soldiers should not do the same. The naval uniform cost about one-third of the military uniform, and with the extraordinary result that instead of having greater difficulty in getting recruits for the Navy there was far less than was experienced with regard to the Army. That disposed of the argument that they must have an unduly ornamented uniform in order to get recruits for the Army. He believed that the advantages and adventures of the military life would be quite sufficient to men to join the Army without this undue ornamentation of the uniform. He, therefore, suggested to the right hon. Gentleman that the appropriate moment had arrived when they should really reconsider the whole theory of military uniforms and ask themselves whether they could not adopt a real working campaigning dress with a fair amount of ornamentation which would serve equally for a campaign and for service abroad, and which would, at the same time, be adequately ornamental for the purposes of the parade-ground. He believed they had gone wrong up to this time only because they had slavishly followed the traditions of Frederick the Great. He hoped they would have the courage to depart from these traditions and adopt a dress that experience in campaigning in all parts of the world had proved the most advantageous.

said, the hon. Member for Preston had quoted an advertisement from a provincial newspaper giving a highly-coloured picture of the inducements which were offered to recruits to join the Army. He suspected that the Committee were not quite aware of the manner in which these advertisements were offered to the newspapers. A considerable sum of money was expended upon them; but they were given, not to the newspapers which had the largest circulation, but rather to those newspapers that happened to support the. Government, whatever might be the extent of their circulation. That might be a rough-and-ready method of stating the fact, but it was the fact nevertheless; and the right hon. Gentleman had practically, in smoother and more delicate terms, admitted that such was the case, because in answer to a question which he put some time ago the right hon. Gentleman told him that the guiding principle was the amount of the circulation of the newspapers, but that he would discover, if he made further inquiries, that the extent of the circulation was apt to vary with the particular Government in Office. That meant that the right hon. Gentleman was only doing what his predecessors had done before him. It could not be a right and proper system. The answer of the right hon. Gentleman might have been humorous, but it was certainly not satisfactory, and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would make an alteration in that respect in the future. It might be proper to spend this money, but they had a right to see that full service was obtained for the public in respect of the money which was authorised to be spent on their behalf, and if it was necessary that these advertisements should go forth, then they ought to be given, without respect to political colour, to those newspapers only which had the largest circulation. He knew of a newspaper which circulated largely throughout a whole county which had had these advertisements for 30 years, but which in the year 1892 had them taken away and they were given to another newspaper with no circulation at all, the only possible reason being that the latter newspaper happened to support the politics of the Government in Office. Such a system amounted to a public scandal, and if continued would lead to jobbery which might even be extended in other directions. They had a right to protest against such a system and to prevent, as far as possible, public funds being made use of for the purpose of subsidising Party organs.

^* said, that with regard to the question of advertisements he rather thought the force of the observations of the hon. Member who had spoken referred rather to the past than to the present. Pressure undoubtedly was brought on a new Government on taking Office to extend their advertising favours to papers which presumably were neglected by their predecessors in Office, but, honestly, he could say that, so far as his Department exercised any influence, they endeavoured to have regard to the primary purpose for which the advertisement was designed, the paper being selected which had the largest circulation. He hoped to see an agreement come to between opposite sides of the House to take this matter entirely out of patronage lines, and deal with it on the common-sense principles that business-men would apply. The hon. Member for Preston had read an advertisement, from a provincial newspaper, addressed to recruits. It so happened that he read the same advertisement in the same paper, and after some of the censure which had fallen from the hon. Gentleman on former occasions, he was very much relieved to find that either with regard to the accuracy or the fairness of the instance the hon. Member had quoted he did not observe anything to which exception could be taken. Good clothing was promised to the soldier, and he got it, including, in the first instance, a complete outfit of socks and underclothing, but there were obvious difficulties in the way of providing a continuous public supply of clothing of that kind. It was gratifying to find that the new system of furnishing the soldier with clothing which was to be his own property had been a success. He was rather astonished to find the hon. Member for Preston speaking in favour of the old system of making up clothing regimentally. That system had been found to work so badly that it was, with general consent, abandoned. A good deal had been said about sweating, and reference had been made to certain passages in the Report of the Committee which charged sweating in the factories of certain contractors.

said, that not only was it alleged in the case of certain contractors, but it was also said to have occurred at Pimlico. This appeared in the evidence before the Committee on Sweating. There were cross-allegations, in one case that the wages paid by the out-contractors were higher than those paid at the factory, and in another case that the wages paid at the factory were higher than those paid by the outside sweaters. The Committee in their Report referred to the case of a man who took a contract for greatcoats at a low rate, and when he was spoken to about it by the Director of Contracts he said that the wages he paid were double those paid to women employed at the Government factory in shirtmaking, and that was the conclusion of the Committee.

^* remarked that it was rather curious to note how vague a term "sweating" was. He found it applied by a number of people to anything in the nature of economy of production, to subdivision of labour, and to the introduction of improved methods of manufacture. What the Government had to look to was that their people in their factories worked under wholesome sanitary conditions, earned fair wages, were happy and contended in their employment, and so far as the Government could judge by constant inspection and constant inquiry into the circumstances they felt that the term "sweating," as it was properly applied, was wholly inapplicable to any department in their employment. In fact, nothing could be more gratifying to his right hon. Friend and himself than for Members of this House to pay a visit to the factory at Pimlico, where they would see the provision which had been made for the convenience and comfort and everything that could contribute to the healthy conditions of employment. In fact, he ventured to say that nothing whatever was lacking that could reasonably be expected from the good employer.

Are the sanitary arrangements good?

had certainly heard no complaints to the contrary. The electric lighting had been extended; the hours were 48 a week; there had been an increase in the minimum wages; and he thought the Government had got a fairly satisfied and happy number of work-people in their service. He had no doubt at all that in times past there had been some justification for the statement that work given out to contractors had been executed under conditions very different from those which now applied. Whatever might have been the case in the past he ventured to think that no such charge lay against them at the present time. Work was only given out to those contractors who were able to execute it under the best system of factory inspection, and those factories in which the work was done were inspected from time to time, as occasion arose, under the direction of the Director of Contracts, who reported that these factories compared very favourably indeed with the Government factories. A case was alluded to only a few months ago with regard to sweating, which seemed to come home to one of their contractors. He had that charge very carefully investigated. The allegation as far as it went was true, but only true in that it was fairly brought home to the contractor who was occasionally employed by the Government, but it was conclusively established that the sweating in question, which consisted of giving out work to be done in unsanitary homes, was not practised upon any workpeople doing work for the Government. Some hon. Members seemed to apprehend that under the term manufactured articles of clothing or "ready made," the Government would be able to acquire clothing made under unfavourable conditions. If hon. Members would turn to page 51 of the Estimates before them they would see how various were the articles included in the term "ready made." Of these, boots and shoes were in the largest quantities, and means were taken to ensure in regard to other equipments the best possible conditions for the workmen engaged. As to obtaining any supplies from foreign countries, he might claim credit for the present Government for having done something to encourage home manufactures. In certain classes of silk articles it was reported to the Government up to a very recent date that their requirements could be met only by German manufactures. He brought the matter under the notice of the Silk Association, with the result that they were satisfactorily supplying what was required, although, he was sorry to say, at a considerably higher price than was formerly paid. Something had been said in regard to shirt-making. In answer to a question which was put to him some time ago on this matter, he made a statement which he would now repeat. Various charitable benevolent associations or societies had been formed in London and Devonport and other parts of the country who had endeavoured to find work for soldiers' wives and widows. They had made strong appeals from time to time to have work of this kind furnished to them. The Government had responded to these appeals; they had supplied these materials cut out in the proper form, and they had paid 40 per cent. to these benevolent agencies higher than the market prices at which the work could be done, and he believed the workers so employed had been able to earn quite as large a wage as, at any rate, their skill entitled them to receive. The Government had satisfied them selves that this particular kind of provision had enabled money to circulate among a class of people who were very necessitous and who had claims upon the State.

Where are these benevolent agencies? Are they in London or the Provinces?

said, they were located in London, Devonport, and, he believed, in various parts of the country, especially where soldiers were to be found. As he had said, the work had been fairly done, although not cheaply done, but it had found employment which had assisted in the maintenance of very decent people. He hoped that his hon. Friends who had asked them to show greater diligence in the placing of contracts would be satisfied with the explanation that he had given. He could assure them that from the moment the Report of the Sweating Committee had been brought under the consideration of his right hon. Friend the greatest care had been exercised, not merely in the placing of these contracts, but in carrying out the system of inspection after the contract had been made. If complaint had reached the Government at any time it had immediately been followed by a surprise inspection, and penalties were enforced against any contractor to whom in any way could be traced any violation of the conditions of the contract. Reference had been made to the importance of providing suitable clothing for those in hot climates. That was rather a matter for the Indian Government. There had been a good deal said as to the suitability of the colour and design of soldiers' clothing. Upon that matter he had no doubt that the observations which had fallen from hon. Members who had given consideration to this subject would receive every consideration from his right hon. Friend and those who were responsible for advising him. As to the question of providing a requisite reserve of clothing, he could assure hon. Members that this was a matter which was receiving the most careful consideration.

said, everyone would recognise the courteous manner in which the Financial Secretary to the War Office had given his reply, but still he ventured to say that the answer of the hon. Gentleman was not altogether satisfactory. The hon. Gentleman had drawn a picture of the Department at Pimlico being under the paternal care of the War Office, watched over by able officers, periodically inspected, and in every way excellent in its sanitary arrangements. But that did not at all tally with the investigations of the Committee which sat to consider this very matter in 1892. Mr. Ramsey, the Director of the Clothing Department, when asked before that Committee whose business it was to see that the provisions of the Factory Act were observed at Pimlico, replied—

"I do not know that we consider it anybody's business to see whether it is complied with."

And Mr. de Quincey, another official, said—

"At present no one is responsible for the discharge of that duty."

That left the matter in a very unsatisfactory condition unless some substantial action had been taken in the meantime by the War Office to see that the requirements of the Factory Act were complied with at Pimlico. The Financial Secretary had said that the War Office were giving out the making of the Army shirts to soldiers' wives, and were paying 40 per cent. more than the current prices for the work. But what could a poor soldier's wife earn by making shirts, toiling night and day? The Westminster Gazette , in a recent article, stated that to make an ordinary Service shirt it took a skilled needlewoman eight or nine hours; and that as she was paid only 7½d. for each shirt, as she had to pay a halfpenny for machining the front of the shirt, and had to provide her own needles and cotton, she earned by working long hours and six days a week the starvation wage of 3s. per week. Were they, he asked, at the end of the 19th century to listen to Hood's "Song of the Shirt," sung under the auspices of the English War Office?

^* said, his hon. Friend, who had drawn a picture of the soldier's wife at shirt-making with such oratorical skill as to win the sympathy of everybody, was hardly aware of the circumstances under which this work was given out. But he should not have interfered between his hon. Friend and the Financial Secretary to the War Office on the question were it not that the late Mr. Stanhope was, as Secretary for War in the late Conservative Government, responsible for the large amount of shirt-making that was now done by soldiers' wives. Hon. Members who made attacks on the way those contracts were given out could not be aware of the enormous difficulty of dealing with the question so that justice might be done between the country and those who carried out the contracts. The House of Commons had decided that the wages to be paid in Government contracts were the wages current in the district, and surely the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War had more than carried out his obligation to the House by paying 40 per cent. more than the prices at which he could get the shirt-making otherwise done. The question of sweating had occupied a great deal of the time of the War Office under the late Government; and he would give the Committee his experience on that question with regard to two classes of clothing supplied by contract. One class was the civilian suits given to soldiers on being discharged. There could not be a better made suit; it was precisely the same class of suit which would be seen on a man servant in any establishment in the morning, and which cost from £2 10s. to £4 10s. Yet contractors were actually elbowing each other at the doors of the War Office to get the contract for those suits at 12s. 6d. to 13s. each. Those were the prices current in the district for that class of work, but the War Office took the course, which had been upheld by the present Government, of forcing every contractor to publish in his factory the price he was going to pay for the making of the suits; and by that means they ran up the price of the suit by a little over 1s., but they more than doubled what the workman got for making it. The other class of clothing was the great-coat which invalid soldiers were required to get and pay for. Those coats were supplied to the War Office at 13s. 6d. each. He bought one, and showed it to two tailors whom he usually employed, and asked them what they would make him such a coat for. One said £3 10s. and the other £4 5s., and he had not the slightest belief that they intended to cheat him. It was an excellent coat. He walked down Bond Street on one occasion wearing it to prove it was a coat that any gentleman might wear; and the lady who walked with him did not detect any difference between it and the ordinary great-coat of the fashion. In the case of that article of clothing also the War Office under the late Government forced the contractor to put up in his factory the exact price he was going to pay the workman for making the coat. But he did not believe that those prices would satisfy Members of the House, though they were much in excess of the wages ordinarily paid; and he mentioned the circumstances in order to point out how extraordinarily difficult it was to stop sweating when there were thousands of persons willing to undertake the work at very low terms. If the present Secretary for War saw his way to giving the soldiers' wives better terms for the making of shirts he should be very glad; but he knew that under the late Government the great anxiety was to get the work at the old terms, and when the War Office took the work away from the contractors and gave it to the soldiers' wives they were told they had done a thing that was very popular. With regard to Pimlico, he should say he thought there was reason for congratulation in the fact that so little complaint was heard nowadays about the factory. He was sure that if his hon. Friends would only inspect the factory themselves they would find it very satisfactory and that work was carried on there under admirable conditions. The Financial Secretary, in answering a question in reference to the stock of Army clothing in reserve, was only able to give a sort of general assurance that the stock would be increased. The matter was, he thought, very important. Seeing the great number which the Army Reserve had now reached, it must be obvious that it was necessary to keep a larger stock of suits of clothes in reserve in case of war than had heretofore been the case, and he would like to know how the right hon. Gentleman hoped to be able to do that without having asked for any increase of the Vote for that particular purpose?

With regard to the question of the wages of soldiers' wives, I think we must bear in mind that, although paid at possibly a much higher rate than is common in the trade, the soldier's wife is often a very inexpert person at the machine, and therefore cannot earn so much as an expert person would. But we cannot help that. We cannot be expected to pay such a rate for the work done as that an inexpert woman would earn as much as an expert woman.

The woman I alluded to was an expert woman, and one who could use a machine.

As regards the general question, the hon. Member quoted from the evidence given before a Committee in 1892. But the Nonconformist conscience and other consciences have since been aroused—the universal conscience has been aroused; we have changed all our manners and methods; the House of Commons itself has taken a new line in the matter, and hon. Members may depend upon it that the direction of the House in the matter of wages will be most earnestly enforced by any Government which may be in the War Office. I can assure the hon. Member for Warwickshire if, as the result of his raising this matter evidence, is produced to show that what he has described is now going on, and if he furnishes me with it I will have a speedy inquiry, and, what is more, a speedy remedy applied. I may add that the time of several high officials in the War Office is considerably taken up trying to investigate cases of the kind which the hon. Member has brought before us. With regard to the reserve of clothing, I have to say that we are trying to put it on a business basis. The principle that has been approved of by my military advisers and myself is that we should maintain clothing for an Army Reserve of 35,000 men, and that the Militia should possess such clothing at their depôts as would enable them to come out when called upon. There may be a little delay; but it will not be long, I hope, before those results are achieved. I pass to the question of the colour of the uniform of the Army, which has been so often discussed before. The invisibility of the colour of the uniform depends on the natural characteristics of the country in which the Army is operating; but however that may be, and though we may be obliged to send uniforms of a certain colour with men going to serve in certain climes, I believe the British nation will stand by the old "thin red line"—by the old red colour which has so often been illustrated in the operations of war. The hon. Member for Lynn Regis referred to the nature of the Army clothing—its tightness and its slackness. Does the hon. Member imagine that I or my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary lay down what the uniforms of the Army shall be? Why, the men who determine the changes, or who resist changes in the uniform of the Army, are men who have had the largest experience in actual warfare; and, therefore, no higher authority on the subject could be obtained. The hon. Member for Macclesfield, who, after discharging his dart, has gone away—and I do not wonder at it, considering the heat—called my attention to the system under which the War Office and other Departmental advertisements are inserted in the newspapers. The hon. Member said that in this matter the Government should not be actuated by such a wretched consideration as political feeling. I cannot help admiring the virtuous sentiments which, no doubt, everyone shares. There was a Debate on this question a year or two ago, and the House declared that there ought to be a stereotyped list of newspapers maintained at headquarters, and that politics should have nothing to do with the distribution of advertisements. We all agreed to that, and everybody was satisfied. But when we came into Office we looked at the newspapers which had been placed on this stereotyped list, and I will confide to the Committee the fact that there was a most extraordinary absence from it of all those Liberal newspapers which one would naturally think ought to find a place on it.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will permit me to say that in selecting the newspapers we went on the principle of the largest circulation.

No doubt that was the principle, but it is a significant fact that the papers which had the largest circulation were always papers which gave support to the late Government. That was the state of things we found when we came into Office, and we were obliged in common decency to insert here and there in the list a newspaper which was not of the same political complexion as the newspapers selected by hon. Gentlemen opposite.

I wish to say a few words on the subject of sweating, on which I had some little personal experience lately, not that I doubt the benevolent intentions of the Secretary of State for War in the matter, but because I think it desirable to clear up what is the precise meaning of the Resolution the House of Commons passed on the subject, and what the Government must be prepared to do if they intend to carry it out. If you are only going to pay for the making of Army clothing—whether suits or great coats, or shirts—the current rate of wages for the same kind of labour, I have no hesitation whatever in saying that the Government will become sweaters, and will employ and continue to employ, people at starvation wages. I say that because the result of the great competition, particularly amongst women, for work of this kind, is that the current rate of wages is undoubtedly a wage on which it is impossible for a human being to live. As I understand the determination of the House of Commons, it is this—that all those persons working for the Government, and therefore for the community itself, should be paid, not the current rate of wages, but that they should be paid—to use a handy phrase, now in vogue—"a living wage." If, in shirt-making for the Army, an expert workwoman, working eight hours a day six days a week, can earn only 3s. a week, then undoubtedly the Government for whom those shirts are made at such a price is guilty of the economic offence of sweating; and if you mean to carry out in its spirit the Resolution of the House of Commons, you must make up your mind to pay not the current rate of wages for the making of the articles you are having made for our soldiers, but a sum very considerably in advance of the current wages. On the subject of the wages in the dockyards, which was discussed here not long since, I understood the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War, speaking for the Government, to repudiate the idea that the Government of the country ought ever to take advantage of the low rate to which competition had forced down the wages of labour in the open market, in order to have Government work done at that reduced rate; and, further, that a fair wage should in all cases be paid by the Government for all work done in the service of the Government. If to that principle the right hon. Gentleman intends to adhere I can assure him that he has my most cordial support. I know there are great difficulties in the way of acting universally on this principle in all the Government Departments. It is not many years ago since it was thought desirable to get all the articles required in the service of the Government at the cheapest rate which the competition in the market would allow, and it is not possible that a system of that kind could be changed in a day. But I hope I am justified in saying that the principle I have described is the principle to which the present Government intend to adhere, which to a certain extent was carried out by the late Government, and which I hope all future Governments will be obliged to continue—namely, the principle of paying those who work for the community a fair living wage.

hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider the propriety of paying a special wage to soldiers' wives when employed as needlewomen. It appeared to him that what they were now receiving was a starvation wage.

^* said, he wished to congratulate his right hon. Friend on the efforts he had made to get the clothing from home manufacturers instead of abroad, in which he was following in the footsteps of his predecessor, the late Mr. Edward Stanhope. But he found that up to the 31st of March, 1893–4, silk braid and cloth to the value of £477 was obtained from abroad. He granted that was not a very large amount, and he admitted that the War Office had set a good example to the Admiralty; but in the current year he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to do a good deal more for the encouragement of home manufactures, and that he would obtain his silk braid and cloth from England instead of a foreign country, and that this item of £477 would not appear in the Return for the year ending on the 31st of March next. Another matter he wished to call attention to was this—namely, what steps were being taken to see that the Resolution passed by the House of Commons in 1891 was carried it out? The Return of contracts with foreigners only applied to contracts with persons outside the United Kingdom, and no steps were taken by the War Department to secure that the articles which the Government ordered should be made at home and not abroad. It was no use printing on specifications the Resolution of the House of Commons of 1891—which was called the Fair Contract Resolution and was designed more especially to meet the evil of sweating—unless steps were taken to ensure that the articles contracted for should be made in the home factories and under the operation of the Factory Laws and the wholesome agency of the Trades Unions and not abroad. Unless steps were taken to ensure that the contracts placed with home manufacturers and home merchants should be made in this country, he submitted that the Resolution of 1891 was practically a farce. He should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in the specification for tenders for Government work, especially for clothing, the manufacturers were required to set up the rates of wages which they pay and the hours of labour? There was no difficulty in that, as it was done in the County Council contracts, and he held such a specification in his hand, which he would be glad to place in the hands of his hon. Friend. On this each contractor was required to set out in alphabetical or other order the names of the several trades he would employ in or about the execution of the contract, the rates of wages paid, and the hours of labour for all work done within a radius of 20 miles of Charing Cross. In two other columns the contractor had to set out the work done elsewhere, and this enabled the Committee before whom the tenders came to judge whether the price paid for wages was such as was in the spirit of the House of Commons Resolution, which had been practically adopted by the London County Council, and what difference there was if the work was done outside a radius of 20 miles of Charing Cross. He did not mean to suggest that the War Office should adopt the radius of 20 miles from Charing Cross, but he would suggest the extreme desirability of requiring this information to be furnished upon the tenders to enable the hon. Gentleman and the officials working under his Department to judge whether the articles would be made at home at fair rates or made abroad. If that information was in the possession of his hon. Friend such evils as had been referred to in the case of shirt-making could not possibly occur. He only raised these points for the consideration of his hon. Friend, who he was sure would give them his best attention, but he would again direct his notice more particularly to the fact that nearly £500 worth of foreign silk braid and cloth was obtained last year from contractors outside the United Kingdom, and express an earnest hope that no such item might appear in the Return ending the 31st March, 1894–95.

asked for some information regarding the clothing of cavalry regiments. Within a very short period—within a year or so—the clothing of the Hussars had been taken away from the regimental clothing shops, and he wished to know the reason for that. He knew what ought to be the reason, and probably he should be told that it was so—namely, because the work could not be done when the regiment was out on service. The question he really wished to ask was this, did the officers commanding the regiment approve of the change? The great complaint in cavalry regiments was the want of employment, and employment in the tailors' shop was very considerable. If the men who were tailors could obtain employment in these shops it kept them steadily at work. Again, when the regiment was on service the tailors were of immense value to make up things and in the repairing of various articles, and his object in rising was to know whether the commanding officers approved of the change?

said, that Item H in this Vote represented a large sum of money, nearly £500,000, as the value of certain clothing in stock, and he wished to ask, in regard to this very large quantity of stock in hand, whether there were now any satisfactory arrangements made for periodical stock-taking? He presumed that these stores were drawn upon for various purposes, and consequently there would be a large remainder of which account should periodically be taken. His experiences in the Committee upstairs led him to suppose that not long ago the arrangements for stock-taking in the Army Clothing Department were very defective, and one remarkable instance came to their notice of losses of stores; not very large, but still losses owing to the defective stock-taking. Not long ago he understood that the stocktaking was every three years, but he was under the impression that now, by a new arrangement, it was annually. When he mentioned that to some of his colleagues upstairs they threw doubt upon it, and seemed to consider there had been no improvement made. He was not sure he ought to ask this question without notice, but possibly the right hon. Gentleman, or his deputy beside him, might have the ready information on the tips of their well-informed tongues, and might acquaint the Committee how the matter stood.

said, he wished to make a few remarks on the subject of sweating. Within his own knowledge, four or five years ago a good deal of the work was actually done in the French military prisons. There was no doubt about it, because it was brought before him, and he brought it before the authorities. That was about five years ago, and Mr. Stanhope was perfectly unaware of what was going on, and the; hon. Member for Guildford (Mr. Brodrick) was unaware of it, and it was just possible that it was even going on now. There were two military prisons on the north coast of France, and the convicts there executed the order that had been given on contract by the English Government for helmets. He found this out by accident, and got it stopped; but when they were found out and brought forward, it was no use to treat the matter with a waive of the hand, as though it was impossible for it to happen under any Government. He did not say these things were being done now, as he had no evidence on the question brought before him since, but he called attention to this subject, because unless it was put in the contract where the goods were to be manufactured there was no doubt that the contractors would get the work done in places where it was never intended it should be done when the contract was given out. When the hon. Member for Guildford (Mr. Brodrick) talked about the current rate of wages he did not think the hon. Gentleman was correct, because the history of a good deal of the Army clothing had been that it had been given out to the cheapest market. A good deal of it was given to Limerick, because that was a cheap market, and then it was withdrawn and given to the East End of London, because that was a still cheaper market. He hoped that the suggestion of his hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Sir J. Gorst) would be carried out. He said that the Government ought to set a good example as a model employer of labour, and should not be satisfied with work done at sweating prices. They had not yet had an answer to the question put by his hon. Friend behind him as to who was responsible for seeing that the Resolution was carried out with respect to these contracts. At the time of the Lords' Committee, Mr. Nepean admitted there was no one responsible, that there was no one under him to see that the clause which the House of Commons Resolution required to be inserted in all contracts was properly carried out. Another point he wished to raise was that of inspection by the ordinary Home Office Inspectors. He did not say that the explosion at Waltham Abbey would have been prevented if there had been such an inspection, but at all events they would do their best to have these factories inspected and perhaps prevent these accidents from occurring. He could not see why Government factories should not be placed under precisely similar inspection to private factories. He believed that no Government Inspector visited the Pimlico factory or any Government factory. No doubt the War Office had its own Inspector to look after these matters, but that did not meet the case; what they wanted was someone to see that the Government factories were carried on with the same regard for the health, safety, and protection of the workmen as was enforced in all private factories. Then, with regard to Pimlico, it was not sufficient to say the wages were about the same as those paid by private firms, because the question with regard to Pimlico was a peculiar one. He would not go into the question as to the desirability of keeping the factory at Pimlico at all. The factory itself was built upon land that was extremely valuable, and was about the very worst site that could be chosen for it. He ventured to say that, standing where it did, the site would run to hundreds of thousands of pounds, and, as far as the War Department was concerned, it was about the worst place in which a factory could be erected. The result was that the workpeople had to live away from their work; they had either to pay excessively high rents in consequence of living in the neighbourhood, or else they had to live at a great distance from their work. Therefore, though the wages might be reasonable, considerable deductions had to be made on account of the excessive rents that had to be paid for house accommodation.

^* said that, with regard to the observations of the hon. Member as to the inspection of Government factories, he could assure him that the Government factories were subject to the Factory Acts just as private un- dertakings were; and though it might be that the Home Office did not recognise the obligation to make the inspection as rigid and as constant as in the case of private factories, the responsibility rested with that Department. The War Office interposed no difficulty, and every suggestion made by those charged with the administration of the Factory Acts received the most respectful and deferential attention. He would remind the right hon. Member for Cambridge University (Sir J. Gorst) that the House of Commons' Resolution dealt not merely with the current rate of wages, but with the question of sweating, with the practice of sub-letting work contracted for, and in placing contracts the Government must have regard to all these points. The Director of Contracts was responsible for seeing that the Resolution was carried out, and he had a staff who investigated the subject of every complaint and saw that justice was done. With regard to the question of shirt-making, they knew that people employed under proper conditions in the factory could make a shirt at a given price and earn good wages. An appeal had been made to them to distribute a certain amount of the work among people who executed it in their own homes. They paid a higher price for this being done by way of a meritorious charity, and therefore it was very hard to have it thrown in their teeth that their work was done under conditions that enabled people to earn only the small wages that had been quoted. It must be remembered that the women who did this work did not devote their whole time to it. They did it at their convenience and in the intervals between their ordinary domestic duties. But he would go very carefully into the matter and would consider everything that had been said with regard to the reproach of having the work done under conditions that did not yield fair wages to the workers. At the same time, he believed they were paying prices which under the ordinary commercial conditions of doing this kind of work were proved to be adequate for the service done. With regard to the cost of uniforms, of course it varied, but if they took the average and compared it with the cost to their continental competitors it could not be said that they were extravagant.

said, that was not the question he asked; his question was whether the officers commanding approved of the removal of the military tailoring shops from the regiments, where they formed an excellent employment for many soldiers in the regiment.

^* said, he was not quite sure; all they knew was that the responsible Minister took the view that the change was an improvement. They were satisfied that under the old system it had been shown conclusively there were opportunities for fraud for which the soldier very often suffered, and that it was very difficult of identification and control. The hon. and gallant Gentleman knew that although the clothes were made up in certain sizes, every regiment had its tailor, so that any suit that required it could be adjusted. The hon. Baronet asked him some questions as to-the stock-taking, and he would tell him that it had been found that the stock-keeping at provincial depôts had been, done under circumstances that had not been satisfactory, and under it there had been losses. But a system had been devised and approved of, and was now being brought into operation, by which a certain number of officers, specially selected for their fitness, were employed for the purpose of visiting the depôts from time to time and testing the stocks, so that they were not dependent now upon mere stock-taking and examination. It had been found that the stock-taking at provincial depôts had been done under circumstances which were not satisfactory; but a system had been devised and approved of, and was now being, brought into operation, by which a certain number of specially selected officers; would be employed for the purpose of visiting the depôts from time to time. He had heard the old story which his hon. Friend the Member for Preston had revived with regard to contracts and prison-made goods a good many times, and he could only assure his hon. Friend that he had very carefully inquired into the matter and had ascertained that, whatever might have occurred in bygone days, nothing of the kind was possible under the present system.

But I stated the whole of the facts up to only five years ago.

As I have said, I have made every possible inquiry, and I repeat that the hon. Member may, at any rate, be perfectly sure that whatever was done under the old system of inspection, nothing of the kind is possible under the present system. I think I have now answered all questions, and that we ought now to be allowed to take the Vote.

^* : I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is a fact that the colours of the British regiments are obtained in foreign countries?

^* : I should like to answer this question upon the Vote for Warlike Stores. I may say, however, that it is perfectly true that the silk employed in making the colours is sometimes of foreign manufacture, but the cost of the material is insignificant when compared with the embroidery and other work expended on it. With regard to the braid and silk dressing, I think I may say that the arrangements now made have rendered the system of purchase more satisfactory than hitherto.

said, he noticed that there was a certain measure of congratulation going on between the two Front Benches. They had heard a good deal about the excellence of the materials served out to the soldiers. He must say he thought little of the suits served out to the soldiers on leaving barracks, and unless there had been some marvellous change in the material and manufacture he did not think that any self-respecting soldier would ever accept one of them unless, upon going out of barracks for the last time, he wanted to look like a convict. He very much doubted whether the soldiers ought to be asked to wear these suits. The soldier who put a great-coat over one of the suits would, at all events, exhibit a considerable amount of discretion. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had received and deserved a certain amount of credit for the experiments which, under his presidency, had been adopted at the larger factories and workshops connected with the Army. If the Government had had the courage to initiate shorter hours, surely they might have the courage to make an experiment in laying down what was a fair rate of wage to be paid for work done for them. If they would be bold enough to take up the same attitude in regard to women's wages in the factories as they had taken in regard to the men's hours, they would receive and deserve their thanks and congratulations. The House of Commons did not wish that the work doled out from Government factories should be regulated by the prices in the district round about. He hoped that one issue of the Debate would be to obtain some advance in the direction of a fair wage. If so, some good work would have been done.

said, he understood from the Financial Secretary that he would see that advertisements were given to those newspapers which had the largest circulation and that there would be some understanding to that effect, so that whichever Party was in power a distribution of advertisements would be made upon the basis of I circulation only, and without regard to the fact as to whether the papers selected did or did not support the Government of the day. He hoped that this arrangement would be carried out in the Provinces notwithstanding the fact that the Provincial Press was largely Liberal and would in any circumstances probably obtain the benefit of the giving of advertisements on non-political lines. On the other hand, he could give instances in which certain newspapers of small circulation were preferred to Conservative papers, and he was desirous that the War Office should see that this injustice was remedied.

said, the principle which the War Office had tried to follow was to establish a list of newspapers depending not upon politics, but upon circulation. That principle was acted upon by the last Liberal Government; but when the change of Government took place, it was discovered that by some extraordinary means a larger selection of papers had been made in the constituencies which supported the Government which had been last in power. That fact rendered him very doubtful whether under any Government they would find that rigid impartiality which they all of them desired to see. He could assure the hon. Member that he would, at all events, see that no newspaper was in the future added to the list without sufficient justification.

said, he was afraid he must ask the right hon. Gentleman to give him some more satisfactory assurance than that which he had just made. Nothing would be satisfactory short of an actual arrangement that should be arrived at with regard to the placing of papers on the advertising list. The present system under which advertisements were given out amounted to a public scandal.

was understood to say that in view of the applications made by the Conservative papers hon. Members should be modest in their demands.

^* said, that for seven years—from 1880 to 1887—the Party to which he had the honour to belong had had no chance of revising the list of newspapers to which advertisements were given, as the arrangements were made early in the year. They had always gone upon the principle of giving advertisements to the newspapers with the largest circulations. There was a consensus of opinion that the papers selected were the best, and he was sorry to find that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War had thought it necessary to make any change. He hoped that whatever was done the system would not be adopted of spreading the advertisements over two papers in the same district, because that was a wasteful plan, inasmuch as in any given district one paper was usually much superior to the other.

The hon. Member for Hanley had told them that the matter would be put right, but neither he nor the Secretary for War had any power over it. The distribution of advertisements rested entirely with the Patronage Secretary, and was managed solely as a Party matter. The House must have been under a complete delusion on this point up to the present time, and he thought all would agree that this system of dealing with advertisement sought at once to be put an end to.

That does not arise on this Vote.

admitted that it only arose indirectly, but the fact remained that a large number of advertisements were issued in connection with the Clothing Vote.

That may be but the cost does not fall on this Vote.

Vote agreed to.

2. £1,807,000, Warlike and other Stores: Supply and Repair.

said, he wished to call the attention of the Committee to a matter in connection with the Ordnance Factory at Enfield, which had created a great deal of interest among his constituents. The men at the factory had for a long time been working short time, and they were put on short hours on the understanding that certain of their fellow-workmen should not be dismissed. Of course, that was only intended to be a temporary arrangement. The men had willingly worked shorter hours in order that others might not lose their employment; but 18 months had elapsed since the arrangement was made, and he thought the time had arrived when some announcement of increased work for the factory should be made by the Government. Surely the men would not have been put on short time unless there was a likelihood of an increase of work for the factory. Another question he had to allude to was the recent issue of an order which prevented the employés making known their grievances otherwise than through their superior officers. The men felt this restriction to be unnecessarily severe, as it prevented them communicating with either their superior officers or others who interested themselves in their welfare. Personally, he felt certain that the recent order had been misrepresented. However that might be, men in private employ had a perfect right to meet and discuss their grievances, and he thought the Government did not desire to place itself in a higher or better position than such employers. He wished also to touch upon a matter connected with the neighbouring factory of Waltham. He had received an immense number of letters as to the inadequacy of the payment made to the widows and other relatives of the men killed in the explosions which had unfortunately occurred there, and he hoped that something would be done by the War Office to help these poor people. There was a Treasury Warrant laying down the exact terms upon which payments were to be made to these people, but it was within the power of the War Office itself to recommend the Treasury to increase the allowances. He was aware that to make an appeal to the Treasury for money was like attempting to draw blood from a stone, but he did hope that the War Office would act as he had suggested in view of the unfairness which these sufferers had had dealt out to them.

This question should be discussed on Vote 16.

said, he, of course, bowed to the Chairman's ruling. He had mentioned the matter under the impression that, as the Vote for the Small Arms Factories was taken without any discussion, the subject could be dealt with on the present Vote. One other point on which he had to ask for information was as to why Colonel M'Clintock, the superintendent of the factory, had retired from his post. It might be said that it was a voluntary act on his part, but the feeling in the locality was that the resignation had been sent in under the pressure of the Government. He next came to the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, several items in which had proved very puzzling to the public. It set forth it was anticipated that the stock-taking made on the 31st March, 1892, would have produced a satisfactory starting point for future transactions at the Royal Gun Factory at Woolwich, but it had since been found that in the case of the finished articles issued during 1892–93 numerous discrepancies had been discovered, and investigation had failed to show how the discrepancies in stock had arisen. In order to balance the account an addition had been made to the number of articles, while the total cost of production remained unchanged, and thus the average price had been reduced, further than that, the effect had been that while for articles supplied in one year to one portion of the Service a certain price was paid, a higher price had to be paid for similar articles supplied in another year to another portion of the Service. There had been a keen controversy between Enfield and Bir- mingham as to the price at which rifles could be manufactured, and it had been asserted that rifles returned as manufactured at Birmingham were not made there, and this led to inquiry. The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General pointed out that the year's production voucher under the head of "Iron Projectiles" gave a value of £56,198 odd, and under the head "Steel Projectiles" £99,705, or a total of £155,903. But if £14,851 were transferred from the sum for iron projectiles to that for steel it was obvious that the transfer would tend to cheapen the cost of the steel articles at the expense of those made of iron. Some such transaction, he believed, had taken place, and he hoped the Financial Secretary to the War Office would be able to give a satisfactory explanation. Was it the fact that the articles made at Woolwich cost more than they ought to, and that the transference was arranged in order to make it appear to the general public that they were produced at the same or lower rates than they would be by private manufacturers? These were questions of vital interest to the Ordnance Factories, and on all the points he had raised he hoped he would get satisfactory explanations. At the present time there was an immense amount of machinery lying idle at Enfield, and that being so he did not think the work turned out at the factory ought to be surcharged with a capital sum in respect of the idle machinery, as such a process unduly swelled the price of the rifles manufactured. It was only natural he should wish to see the rifles made by his constituents proved to be the cheapest possible in point of cost of manufacture as compared with the produce of other factories, and though he did not wish to unduly press the matter of the divergence of price, he did think that if comparisons of costs were to continue to be made public, Enfield should have every advantage allowable with fairness and justice.

^* said, he thought that the hon. and gallant Member would admit that the men employed at Enfield had been treated with a very large amount of consideration during the past year or so. The Government had been compelled to choose between diminishing the number of men employed there or reducing the hours all round, and, in adopting the latter course, the Government were following a strongly expressed desire by the workpeople themselves. Lately, when confronted with a similar question, the Government had thought it desirable to avoid taking on a larger number of men, desiring to avoid discharges hereafter. There had been some most exaggerated statements current as to the diminution of work, arising no doubt from the fact that the Government came to the conclusion not to go on manufacturing a weapon in excess of their requirements. When the time came for the distribution of work to the different factories, a difficulty arose with regard to a particular pattern, and that led to some diminution of the work, but the men had nevertheless been kept on. They had, however, now turned the corner. The new patterns had been approved, and the new carbine was in course of manufacture. He hoped, therefore, that in the course of a week or a fortnight they would be able to put on full time all the men at present employed at Enfield. As to another point alluded to by the hon. Member, there was not the smallest desire on the part of those charged with the administration to interfere with the fullest opportunities the men might choose to exercise in discussing their personal grievances. The authorities did, however, object to the men taking part in public meetings called to discuss the policy of the War Office or the distribution of work in the different factories. The Committee would, he thought, recognise the difference between the two. The War Office were charged with the expenditure of money voted by Parliament, and it was their duty to see that it was distributed as fairly as possible. They had, he maintained, been actuated, in dealing with all the matters which had been alluded to by the hon. and gallant Member, by regard to the best interests of the Service of the State. He must sympathise with his hon. and gallant Friend in the excursion he had made into the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. But he might point out that whenever any point was raised either by a Member of the Public Accounts Committee or by the Comptroller and Auditor General the individual officer charged with the responsibility for the particular factory involved was subjected to a searching examination, and he thought these matters might safely be left to the Committee. But he did wish to protest against the assumption which seemed to underlie the remarks of the hon. Member that the figures of cost had not been fairly stated. This was a very old controversy between Spark brook and Enfield, but he would point out that the difference between the two was comparatively small, and was dependent upon the proportion which the output bore to the full capacity of the factories respectively.

^* said, he had to call attention to a matter which seriously affected his constituency. About seven years ago an Army contracting firm carrying on business at Bermondsey was, in consequence of the action of the House, struck off the list of contractors. He was not going to speak lightly of the offence with which they were charged, but he did think it was made to appear a great deal worse than the merits really demanded, and he was sorry there were no experts in the House at the time, so that the question might have been properly dealt with. Concerned as he was in a kindred trade to that carried on by the firm in question he was bound to say he had no doubt that Messrs. Ross and Company had been very hardly dealt with. For every crime there should be a punishment; but surely there ought to be some limit to the punishment, even for the offence of submitting to the Government goods which were inferior to sample. The samples on which the firm tendered were in themselves extremely faulty. In further excuse for the firm he would like to say that at the time this trouble arose the head of the firm was a young man recently home from College and without any practical experience in the trade. One of the principal partners took the matter so much to heart—for the firm had always borne a very high reputation in the trade—that he died soon after, and another partner retired from the firm. The complaint made was that the hides supplied by Messrs. Ross and Company contained an undue proportion of glucose. But he did not think the firm were alone in the use of glucose for leather-dressing at that time, although its use had since been discarded. But all this happened seven years ago; the firm had ever since been kept off the contractors' list, and the punishment had, of course, been extended to a great many innocent families in Bermondsey. Certainly the firm had not lost all its trade, because it supplied a specialty which the Government could not do without, but the authorities declined to recognise Messrs. Ross and Company, who consequently lost part of their fairly earned profits, and were at the same time deprived of all credit for the goods which they did supply. Did not the right hon. Gentleman think that the firm had, under the circumstances, been sufficiently punished? The trade of Bermondsey had long been languishing. Could not the work now again be given to Messrs. Ross and Company? The decision of the authorities in 1888 was that they should not be invited to tender "until further notice." He submitted that justice had now been satisfied, and that the period "until further notice" had fully matured. The firm had suffered a sufficient penalty, and he made a personal appeal to the Secretary of State for War to reinstate them in the list of contractors, and thus confer a benefit on numbers of poor workpeople in Bermondsey who had been innocent sufferers.

said, he should like to support the appeal of his hon. Friend. He had, he said, dealt with the firm in question for a great number of years, and knew them to be an honourable firm, saving only the instance for which they should now be taken to have purged their offence. He could never understand how a firm so straightforward in its dealings could have been led into such an offence as it evidently was led into. It had suffered very severely in its reputation in consequence, and many of their workpeople had been thrown out of employment. He hoped the Committee and the Government would consider that the time had now arrived when the firm should be restored to the list.

said, that as he was one of the Members who drew attention to the quality of the leather supplied for cavalry saddles, and as he went down and saw the manner in which the article was produced, he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would not accede to the appeal of the two hon. Members who had last spoken. A repetition of the perished leather, which was doctored with glucose, was not wanted. As to the appeal made on behalf of the workpeople of Bermondsey, he might point out that when work was displaced it went elsewhere. In this instance it went from Bermondsey to Walsall, where it was satisfactorily turned out. Neither the Government nor the late Mr. Stanhope were to blame for the loss inflicted on the workpeople; the fault was that of the firm, which sought to palm off on the authorities indifferent goods.

said, he also hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would not yield to the appeal. The firm lost its position not for a single, but for a long series of offences—of the very worst character that could have been committed by a contractor. He was sorry for the workpeople of Bermondsey, but there was no justification for depriving the people of Walsall of the work which had been transferred to them. If the work was being well done at Walsall it was monstrous that it should be taken away from them merely because the hon. Member opposite, who had a political connection with the locality, chose to make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman in their favour from political motives.

^* said, he thought that very unfair, and he was sure it arose from ignorance. He was sure the hon. Member for Preston did not wish to administer a personal affront, but, as a matter of fact, the only Member of this firm, Mr. Tomlin, was the Chairman of the Tory Association of Bermondsey, and therefore he could not be charged with having been influenced by political motives in bringing forward this matter. Mr. Tomlin was a man who stood extremely high in Bermondsey, both socially and commercially, notwithstanding the judgment passed on him by a Committee some seven years ago. He hoped the hon. Member would withdraw his accusation, seeing that Mr. Tomlin was his (Mr. Barrow's) most powerful antagonist.

said, that he had not meant his words to be taken in the sense in which the hon. Member had taken them. He was protesting against a Member using his political influence as a Member of the House.

Do not you?

thought his complaint was a perfectly fair one. He did not think supporters of the Government should urge forward the interests of their own constituents in this way.

Who else is to represent them? Who represents Preston?

said, it was all very well for the hon. Member to say that Mr. Tomlin was Chairman of the Conservative Association in Bermondsey. He (Mr. Hanbury) also had been fortunate enough to get the support of the Chairman of the Radical Party in Preston, and no doubt gentlemen were often appreciated by their opponents, and sometimes got their votes. He objected to any hon. Member using his political influence in that House to bring pressure upon a particular Department. The hon. Member had pleaded that Mr. Tomlin was a young man when the difficulty occurred. That might be a good argument, but the hon. Member had gone on to say that the firm had for many years been deliberately evading the decision of the War Office by supplying goods to the Department through another firm.

No, no.

Yes. The hon. Member said they had deprived Messrs. Ross—as he (Mr. Hanbury) used to call them—of half their profits, because they now had to send in their goods through another firm.

Not surreptitiously.

Then the hon. Member meant to say that the War Office knew that they were receiving goods from Messrs. Ross through another firm. It came to this: that in spite of the ban put upon their goods the War Office, with their eyes open, allowed Messrs. Ross to supply articles through another firm. He could not believe it. It should be remembered that this firm had been punished deliberately, after careful inquiry in the House, and after an investigation had been made at Woolwich by the Judge Advocate General. The case against the firm was proved by men whom he had reason to believe had been very badly treated by the Military Authorities—by two faithful workmen who had discharged their duty loyally in opposition to their superiors. The firm had been detected in supplying goods made of bad leather to the War Office, and it should be remembered that the life of a soldier might depend upon the soundness of the articles which were served out to him. The life of the Prince Imperial was lost owing to the giving way of a bad stirrup. There had been men from Messrs. Ross's factory acting as Army Inspectors and passing the bad leather into the Service, and the fact was detected by faithful and patriotic workmen who had to fight their battle, not only against the War Office, but against the heads of Departments who tried to stifle their complaints. When it had been found possible for once in a way to detect a fraudulent contractor whose bad work might have led to the loss of hundreds or thousands of lives, were, they, forsooth, to throw away the advantage of being able to hold up this firm before the country, and indirectly to say to any contractor who liked to repeat such conduct:—"You have only got to be struck off the list for five or six years, and then a grateful country will condone the offence because that offence was detected before any damage was done"? He was sure that the right hon. Gentleman had too great a regard for the safety of the men and too much respect for the honour of the Public Service to accede to such a proposal.

said, the hon. Member for Preston had raised a very serious question—namely, that there were in the employ of the War Office men who passed material which was unfit for the Public Service. As a practical man of business he (Mr. Clough) put it to the Secretary for War that if this were so the fault was the fault of the War Office, inasmuch as the men employed in the War Office ought to have rejected the material which was not of proper quality. If the Government had not men in their service who could say whether the goods supplied were not of proper quality he did not see why the contractors should be particularly punished. The firm referred to sent home goods that were not suitable, but the goods were not refused. He wished to know was there to be no forgiveness for a firm who had supplied goods that had not been rejected by the War Office officials? If so, and such a system were to be carried out throughout the whole of the business world, life would become impossible. Under these circumstances, he joined in the appeal made by his hon. Friend the Member for Bermondsey (Mr. Barrow)—namely, that this firm might be restored to the list. It was the fault of the War Office if goods which were not suitable were passed, and this firm ought to have the opportunity of being again put on the list of tendering firms.

^* said, he could not allow the speech which had just been made to pass without protest. He thought the hon. Member could not be himself aware of the nature of the argument he had brought before the Committee, which was really that a contractor was justified in sending in any quantity of goods of bad quality.

I never said so. I said if a contractor does send in unsuitable goods it is the business of the Department to reject them.

said, that meant that the contractor was justified in sending in unsuitable goods, and that the onus lay on the Department of discovering those of bad quality. The hon. Member's suggestion was that the War Department was bound to keep so complete a check upon the goods supplied that if inferior goods were passed the War Office, and not the contractor, was to be regarded as primarily in fault. He did not think the hon. Member was a Member of the House at the time when this firm was struck off the list, or that he had read the observations of the Judge Advocate General on the case. Messrs. Ross were by far the largest contractors to the Army, and sent in more goods than all the other contractors put together. During the five years preceding the Judge Advocate General's statement they sent in 1,687,000 different articles, and the rejections amounted to nearly 9 per cent. of the whole of these articles. Yet after those rejections had taken place the gravest scandals had occurred with reference to some of the articles that had not been rejected.

, interrupting, pointed out that at the present time there was a larger percentage of rejections on boots than the 9 per cent. mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

said, his point was that while the primary rejections amounted to 9 per cent., grave scandals occurred with reference to the articles that had been accepted. If business were to be carried on in the way advocated by the hon. Member it would be absolutely impossible to pursue the system of contracting without enormously increasing the cost for inspection. The Judge Advocate General made an impartial Report on this case. The late Government who dealt with the question was not the Government, as it happened, under whom the articles had been supplied, and, therefore, they came to the question with their minds absolutely free and unprejudiced. The hon. Member for Bermondsey did not put the question on a fair basis. The hon. Member had said that Mr. Tomlin did not know the amount of glucose that had been used. That, however, was not the only question. The Judge Advocate General reported with regard to pack-saddles that the complaint that their hardness had caused sore backs to the horses was made out, and he also reported that the saddles were filled with defective hair, which had been put in by Messrs. Ross's workmen. On the question of harness, the evidence of experts was that the goods supplied by Messrs. Ross and Co. were inferior both with regard to the leather outside and to the lining inside. The Judge Advocate General stated that he had several of the articles cut open for his personal inspection, and he saw in every case that the lining of those articles was inferior to that of the sealed sample. According to the hon. Member's contention, every article ought to have been cut open before it was passed by the War Office.

said, his contention was that if the War Office were manned by proper and competent persons the goods referred to would never have entered the Department at all. At Pimlico a length of cloth was submitted to a specific test as to length, and to a chemical test as to colour, and if it did not stand the tests it was rejected.

^* said, he did not think the hon. Member had improved his case, or that he had acquainted himself with the history of Messrs. Ross's proceedings. He (Mr. Brodrick) had no animus against Messrs. Ross. His only desire was that justice should be done. Messrs. Ross were struck off the list not on the initiative of Her Majesty's Government, but because there was a feeling in the House of Commons that there had been a general demoralisation of the trade, and that in that demoralisation Messrs. Ross, who supplied more articles than all the other firms put together, and whose supplies had been over and over again found wanting, must be held to have taken a leading part. It was among their articles that there had been the largest number of rejections, and yet it was among their articles after they were passed that the largest number were found to be defective. The late Government could never by any possibility have obtained a majority in the House of Commons upon this question if they had not struck Messrs. Ross off the list. That step was thus forced upon them by the House of Commons and by public opinion, and it was entirely in accordance with their own views. The evils of the contract system were at times extremely great, and the provision of some better system exercised the minds of the War Office for several years. It had been suggested that Messrs. Ross had received a certain amount of employment by a back door. He believed that Messrs. Ross had supplied a certain amount of buff leather, which could be obtained from very few firms, to those who had contracts with the War Office. But as far as he knew, however, from the time the firm was struck off up to 1892 no single article of Messrs. Ross's manufacture was brought into the War Office. Of course, the Government were not responsible for where the Volunteers obtained their supplies. For all he knew, Messrs. Ross might have received employment from them; and it was possible that the cessation of the Volunteer orders, now that the fund voted by the House for the equipment of the Volunteers was exhausted, might be the reason of the distress referred to by the hon. Member for Bermondsey. It was, of course, for the present Secretary of State to decide whether the punishment Messrs. Ross had received was or was not sufficient. The late Government had felt that they would not be justified in putting them on the list again, but that it was better to build up a fresh system of contracting, so that there would be plenty of firms to fall back upon if an emergency occurred, and if the Secretary of State went back upon that decision he must necessarily accept the responsibility.

I regret that, with the responsibility I have in this matter, it is impossible for me to adopt the view of my hon. Friends behind me. I cannot rise to the heroic height of the hon. Member for Preston, who rebuked the hon. Member for Bermondsey for bringing the matter forward because he was Member for Bermondsey; and yet, in a sentence immediately before, he had appealed to the Members for Walsall and Lichfield, asking whether they would not have something to say; and I am very much mistaken if the hon. Member himself, although he is Member for Preston, has not a close connection with the County of Stafford. Everyone of us may have little local sympathies or prepossessions and predilections, and my hon. Friend the Member for Bermondsey and others are not more open to rebuke on that ground that anyone else. Who was the last speaker before the subject was entered upon? It was the Member for Enfield, who discoursed on the various grievances of his constituents in the Enfield factory. That, of course, is a small matter, and I am not going to enter in any degree into the late quarrel between the War Office on the one hand and the Messrs. Ross and Co. on the other. I think it is quite possible that an ordinary contractor dealing with a commercial firm might consider that they had purged their offence by being kept off the list for seven years. Many excuses might be made for Messrs. Ross, and, if the matter were to be dealt with on ordinary commercial principles, it is quite natural for my hon. Friend to urge that the time has come when Messrs. Ross could be reinstated. But those who have to find supplies for the Government cannot deal with contractors on ordinary commercial principles; we have something more to consider. We have, in the first place, to consider the vital importance of obtaining sound articles of equipment, on which there might depend the success of military operations and the lives of our soldiers. It is not a question of receiving goods by contract for the purpose of resale and the making of profit; but it is a question in which the lives of men are concerned. When we find before us a flagrant case of the supply of inferior articles, however hard it may be upon the contractors—and, I believe it was done at a time when there was no very efficient control on the part of the Department—still we cannot regard that, but must act with a sense of the responsibility resting upon us. We have to remember that our responsibility is the greater because in a Government Department there is not the same constant personal stimulus and inducement to careful administration that there is where a man's own pocket is concerned. Therefore, in any Department, when we find a case like this occurring, we cannot afford to be so merciful as a person in private trade might be. We have also other contractors to consider, and we must not take any step which would tend to encourage laxity, either on their part or on that of our own officials. On these grounds, after giving the matter the fullest consideration, I cannot see my way to reinstate Messrs. Ross and Co. I am sorry for them, because I think there is much to be said in extenuation of their offence. I am very sorry for the people of Bermondsey, who may lose the labour that kept them in comfort owing to this action, not of ourselves but of Messrs. Ross and Company, but I cannot see my way to relieve them, much as I should wish to do so, at the cost of what I believe to be absolutely necessary for the security and the efficiency of the Public Service.

said, that as his name had been mentioned by the hon. Member for Preston in connection with the subject of the local placing of contracts, he would say one or two words with regard to it. It seemed to him perfectly legitimate and right that every Member should be allowed to see that his constituency got fair play in the distribution of the orders of the War Office, or any other Department. It was probably from that point of view that the Member for Preston mentioned his name in connection with this subject, but nobody, he was sure, desired to push anything of this sort further than was necessary to get fair play. With regard to the manner in which contracts were carried out, he quite agreed with the War Secretary that this was a question on which the lives of soldiers might depend. If contractors supplied bad material, it was hard to follow up all the disasters which might result from such a course. He must, whilst on this point, repudiate the doctrine that any laxity on the part of the War Office in regard to inspection could in any way palliate the breaches of a contractor. It seemed to him that if they once admitted that idea the consequences would be disastrous. The inspection of warlike stores was always extremely difficult. They must always trust to the honour of contractors to a considerable extent in respect to medical stores. For example, it was impossible to get proper inspection. He submitted, that when once they found that a contractor had supplied bad material they should strike his name off the list and keep it off—

Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; Committee counted, and 40 Members being found present,

(resuming) said, there was in connection with this Vote a matter to which be wished specially to draw attention. He alluded to the supplying of boxes for the use of the soldiers to keep their little valuables and private property in. The soldiers in India, who had had their boxes supplied to them, found that they were extremely useful, and they missed them very much when they came back to England. He was sure that the Secretary of State for War, who was always anxious to look after the personal comfort of the soldier, would keep this subject before him. It was extremely important that they should look after these matters especially in the interests of recruiting. Regard for the comfort of the soldier in the barrack room was a point which affected recruiting more that any other. Only by attending to these details could they ensure that men would be attracted to the ranks of the Army. Boxes had been partially issued in the country, but he was informed that none whatever had been issued in the Western, the Northwestern, and the Thames districts. He pressed this matter on the attention of the Secretary of State.

said, that provision was made this year for a further supply of soldiers' boxes. The total number required would be 145,000, and up to the year 1893–94, about 40,000 had been supplied, and in 1894–95 20,000 more would be issued, and they hoped to complete the issue at an early date.

said, he should like to know from the right hon. Gentleman how many rifles and carbines were being manufactured this year? The Secretary for War had objected to state how many rifles were in the United Kingdom. But surely that could not be information of a very valuable or of a confidential character. He was not much enamoured of carbines, seeing that the new rifle was very short, but he should like to know if the carbines were going to be constructed in such a way that they would carry exactly the same ammunition as the Infantry rifle? This was an important matter. The other day it was stated that there was an abundance of small arms ammunition. It would be interesting to know what was the amount at present in store, what was the manufacturing capacity of the country to make that ammunition, and how much was to be made in the next year. He should also like to know how many Martini-Henry rifles they possessed capable of being changed into the Lee-Metford rifle? for they were told this was to be done. He would like to have an estimate as to how many hundred thousands it was thought would be changed in the next 12 months. He inquired whether the Government were still manufacturing black powder cartridges or were entirely manufacturing cordite? At what rate, he asked, did the present smokeless powder wear out the barrels of the rifles? He did not think much of a weapon the barrel of which was worn out after 2,000 rounds. That was a very short life for a rifle. Another point he should like to have information upon was as to how many breech loading field guns of the new pattern they had now. But the present pattern of field gun seemed to be a very good pattern, and he would like to know exactly how many of the guns there were in the hands of the Royal Artillery. Two years ago he was the only Member who stood up in the House against the proposed abolition of the Volunteer Field Artillery, because, it was said, the Volunteers could not work field artillery; but he was glad that the Volunteer batteries had since been re-established, and he would like to know how many guns the Volunteer Artillery had got?

said that, like his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Lichfield, he would not refer particularly to the very painful case, which the Committee had just under consideration, except to congratulate, if he might do so with all respect, the Minister for War upon the firm and unassailable attitude he had taken up in the matter. But he desired to say a few words in regard to a note in the Estimates relating to the Vote before the Committee. The note set forth the value of the stores for which they were voting the money as £4,500,000, and the Vote showed an expense of £200,000 for testing and inspecting the stores. Of that sum £145,000 were for the cost of the establishment, and £60,000 for the cost of stores which had been used in experiments. It would appear, therefore, that the country was paying a very considerable sum—fully 5 per cent. of the total value of the stores—for providing a really trustworthy inspection of the stores; but he was sure the House would not grudge even a charge of something like £250,000 sterling per annum for the assurance that the Army did get really good stores of every kind, for upon the strength and serviceability of such stores the safety of our soldiers in war might depend. He would draw attention to the fact that out of the £140,000 paid for testing the stores, not less than £110,000 went in wages. One would have thought that the inspection and testing would be carried on by officials who were comparatively well paid, and one, therefore, did not understand why such a large proportion of the sum was required for wages. There was no doubt of the extreme importance of this establishment being in every way efficient. They had had that evening a melancholy instance of the cost to the country that would result from this establishment failing in any way in efficiency. But on that point he was anxious to confirm what had been said by his hon. Friend the Member for Guildford, that however efficient this establishment might be, it was impossible—even though the cost might be four times greater than it was—to provide that the stores were really good if contractors were ever to be allowed to offend with impunity. It had been suggested that if malpractices had been proved against a particular contractor, he might be absolved from the consequences of his malfeasance if only negligence against the War Office could be proved. Surely, no fault on the part of the War Office could excuse a breach of faith on the part of a contractor. The War Office might be to blame to any extent conceivable, but that could in no way justify immoral offence of the contractor in furnishing goods below specification. There was one plea he desired to submit to the Minister for War. The valuation of stores, as doubtless the right hon. Gentleman knew, had been very defective in past years, as had been proved to a Committee upstairs of which he was a Member. A Departmental Committee had been sitting on this subject for some time, under the very able presidency of Dr. Anderson, than whom a more accomplished officer was not to be found in our scientific service. But there had been great delay in the operations of that Departmental Committee; and that delay had furnished some cause of complaint to the Committee upstairs. No doubt there were many reasons why there should be some delay; but the delay was excessive, and was the cause of embarrassment to the accounts of this Department; and the request of the Committee upstairs was that the Minister for War should assist them in securing efficiency in the valuation of stores, economy in the prices and accuracy in the accounts, by expediting the work of the Departmental Committee under Dr. Anderson.

commended the action of the right hon. Gentleman the Minister for War with reference to contractors found guilty of improper conduct in deciding that those contractors should not be employed by the War Office for some time to come. A grave offence having been committed, it was only proper that grave censure and punishment should be inflicted. A system of bribery appeared to have been inaugurated in the Government Departments which had led to the scandalous affairs to which attention had been called that evening. If any business firm tried to cheat any Member of the House in his private affairs, and bribed his servants to cheat him, surely he would never employ that firm again; and he thought they should apply in public life also the maxims which guided them in private life.

^* called attention to the condition of Government labour in the Woolwich factory, in which the experiment of an eight hours day had been introduced in the past year. He wished to know whether all branches of the factory were now working on the eight hours system; whether, in the matter of wages and other respects, the men had been placed at any disadvantage by the change, and he was sure that, if the Minister for War had any information as to the effect of the change on the healthy condition of the men and their home comforts, the Committee would be glad to hear it. With regard to the manufacture of cordite, he had asked the right hon. Gentleman two months ago whether he could give the House an undertaking that the manufacture of cordite would be carried out by the Government themselves in proper factories, instead of by private contractors. He was sorry to say he got a very unsatisfactory answer on that occasion. The right hon. Gentleman then said he could not undertake to keep the manufacture of cordite in the hands of the Government; that, on the contrary, the Government were determined to place all they knew about the manufacture of cordite at the disposal of private firms, and to invite contracts for its supply. The reason given for this decision, which was really contrary to all modern notions, was that nearly 40 years ago, or about the time of the Crimean War, an understanding was come to that not more than half of any particular warlike stores should be manufactured in the Government workshops, and that the other half should go to private firms. He would ask the Minister for War to consider whether the time had not come for doing something towards modifying the action of his Department in this matter. The main reason which induced the Government to put contracts into private hands was that, previous to the time he had mentioned, private contractors used to supply almost everything to the nation, and that those firms had engaged large staffs and laid down machinery which would be perfectly useless to them if the Government undertook the entire manufacture of the articles themselves. But that reason did not apply in the present instance at all. No machinery had been put down by any private firm for the manufacture of cordite, and a perfectly free hand was left to the Government to take the action which he suggested. Great changes had taken place during the last 40 years. One was that the Government factories had been changed from the unbusiness like institutions which they were then into real business establishments capable of competing with any private firm; and he heartily joined in the commendations of the excellent improvements which had been effected in the Woolwich factory under Dr. Anderson. This change had been brought about by the late Government, so that it was not a Party matter at all. Every section of the country rejoiced that they had got such an excellent factory and one under such good management. The Government had got a factory at which the work could, perhaps, be done better than it could by any private firm. He should like to know what the Government proposed to give for cordite. There was a general belief that they proposed to pay nearly twice as much as they could manufacture it for themselves, and if that were the case it would be a waste of money. Some information should be afforded the Committee as to the relative cost of manufacture in private hands and in Government factories. If the Government undertook this on their own account it would promote the good work to which they were already committed of trying to improve the conditions of labour in Government workshops. Whenever contracts for Government work were given out to private firms, it was difficult to prevent sweating, whereas the treatment of the men in Government factories came under the cognizance of the House of Commons. He wished they had more complete details as to the wages paid than were obtainable under the present system; but, at any rate, Members could see that men were treated properly in Government factories, and that sweating was repressed. When contracts were placed in private hands it led to great fluctuations of labour, and nothing caused more distress than fluctuations of work from one part of the country to another on short notice. If work went to a private firm for the manufacture of cordite, say in Leeds, or Birmingham, or Newcastle, 500 or 600 hands might be put on. Many of these people would come from a distance; they would all require houses, which would have to be rented, and some newly-built. In a year or two the Government would apply for new contracts, the orders would fall into different hands, and desolation would come upon the little village that had been formed, and 500 or 600 people would have to travel from one end of the country to the other. He would suggest that these fluctuations would be best avoided by manufacturing all the cordite required at Government factories. Besides the manufactory at Waltham Abbey, another at Pitsea, which had water communication with Waltham Abbey—might be established. Two or three factories might be set going, so as to be prepared for accidents such as those which had occurred at Waltham Abbey recently. Was it too late to prevent the issue of these contracts for the manufacture of cordite? If so, would the right hon. Gentleman give them information of the price he was going to pay, and inform them from time to time of what was being done?

^* said, he was glad to avail himself of the opportunity of saying a few words, though he was not able as yet to speak with confidence as to the result of the experiments made in regard to the hours of labour for workmen. The country had been assured by the Secretary for War that the decision to adopt an eight hours working day had only been arrived at after very careful investigation, not merely at Government factories, but also at those private works throughout the country at which the ex- periment had been tried. They had not entered Co this very important change without considerable anxiety and a full sense of responsibility, and he was happy to inform the House that as far as they had gone the experiment had more than justified expectations. The breakfast hour had been abolished, which necessitated the taking of the early meal before starting for work. They had had from time to time to make certain re-adjustments of piecework rates, but these had been rather in the direction of a reduction and never once in the direction of an increase. He found that the average wages worked out for a period before change at an average of 31s. 5·3d., and after the change at 31s. 8d., showing that in the shorter time and under the new Regulations the men had been able to earn a larger wage than in the longer time and under the old conditions. Returns showed that, by working under more favourable conditions, workmen were able to do more than recoup any loss to which they might have been exposed by the shortening of the hours. It was found that the piecework men set the pace of the work, and this pace had been fully maintained by the day-wage men; and the consequence was a satisfactory result all round. Although the experiment had been made chiefly in the summer months, there was every reason for believing that certain economies that had been realised would be more than maintained in the winter months. In some departments there had been difficulty in accommodating the occupation of men to a statutory eight hours; in such cases as attending to the railway accommodation and waiting for the casting furnaces the service was not continuous work; but, with these exceptions, the Director General was encouraged by the experience they had had to make a regular 48 hour week either by shortening the hours on six days a week or by suspending work on Saturdays and devoting the time saved to the necessary repairs, which could be done only when work was suspended, and which heretofore had required that the men should be employed in overtime. The variety of work in all the various diversities of our great factory system required that there should be a certain elasticity, in the adoption of a principle. In the building department, for instance, the men worked different hours in summer to those they worked in winter. He was bound to express his satisfaction with the cordial and hearty manner in which those charged with the responsibility of the experiment had co-operated in carrying it out; and they frankly stated their satisfaction with the results. The Director General, who gave his consent after careful consideration, had been cordially supported by the managers and the foremen of works; and all concurred in stating that the success of the experiment had been complete. There had been ground for hesitancy, and there were some men who were a little timid at accepting a change that would disturb the habits of a lifetime—who were doubtful of the means of conveyance to the factory, the hours of the train service, and so on. There was a little friction to be expected at first, but after that had worn off it might be taken for granted that the system would be recognised by all those brought under it as giving fairer conditions under which work could be done. A larger amount of leisure had been obtained without any sacrifice of wages or any loss of service to the State. Incidentally the women appreciated the fact that their husbands could now take breakfast with them and with the children before going to school. The outcome was one of undoubted advantage to all concerned without any additional expenditure. With reference to cordite, it was recognised, and had always been recognised by successive Governments, as important that there should be sources of supply and means of manufacture outside those under the control of the Government, so as to enable them to go through any possible ordeal. The difficulties which had presented themselves in past times had always shown how extremely important it was that they should have in different parts of the country sources of supply ready for emergencies. Therefore, private manufacturers had been encouraged to invest capital; and in certain cases plant had been put down and the machinery provided for large production. The Government had done their best to stimulate them in these enterprises. Capital had been invested and plant had been provided, and facilities for production had been secured which, in dull times like these, must have put the manufacturers in serious difficulty. But his hon. Friend had pointed out that that which might have been true of weapons and powder did not apply to the new cordite ammunition. It was quite true that up to the present the Government had depended upon its own factories, but that was because the use of cordite was experimental. They had been going through the initiative stage when it was impossible for anyone to speak with anything like confidence. They had gone on from one invention to another, and he would be a rash man who would say that cordite would not at some time be superseded. But at present, at all events, it was increasing in favour for both small arms and quick-firing guns, and the demand was growing rapidly. The power of production had been paralyzed for some time by the explosion at Waltham; but the Government had considered their responsibility for meeting future demands, and had determined to throw themselves to some extent upon private enterprise. The demand for this material would become enormous, and he could not imagine any responsible Ministry accepting the responsibility for the production of the whole supply in Government factories. They were glad to think they were able to induce private firms to come to their aid and make a sufficient quantity of cordite to satisfy the Government demand. He was not prepared to say—and he was sure he was speaking in the name of his right hon. Friend—what rules would be laid down as to the proportions of the explosive to be made in the Government and the private factories. They, at any rate, felt that it would be neither expedient nor just to limit the power of production to a Government factory. It was a curious fact which would be realised by Members of the Committee that, whereas a few years ago Government had to satisfy the House of Commons that they were doing justice to the private trade, a change had now come over public sentiment, and a tide had now set in favour of the Government establishments. He recognised in this a tribute to the fairness and wisdom with which Government factories were being administered. The Ordnance factories were now managed as nearly as possible as independent factories, and were no longer exclusively a branch of the War Office. This arrangement had been made in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee appointed by his right hon. Friend, over which Lord Morley presided and on which he (Mr. Woodall) had himself had the honour of serving. Under that system the Ordnance factories were practically managed as a commercial undertaking, producing in competition with the ordinary trade, the results of their work being submitted to an independent inspection precisely as the products of an ordinary manufacturer. They felt it would not do to carry the principle of Government factories too far, and that it was of the extremest importance, and must, in the event of any kind of emergency be even of vital importance, that they should keep alive sources of private supply. The hon. Member said that if contracts were given out they caused fluctuations in work. But that was true equally of Government factories. There was no more painful duty than that of having to effect a necessary diminution in the number of men called in upon an emergency and for whom work could no longer be provided. Men dismissed under these circumstances had to find employment in places already overcrowded. He could assure the hon. Member that the Government looked on this matter sympathetically and were not blind to the circumstances mentioned. He hoped he had succeeded in satisfying his hon. Friend.

^* asked what was the difference in the cost of cordite made by private firms and that made in the Government factory?

said, he could not give that. He was willing to admit, however, that the Government would have to pay for the first contracts a higher price than the cost of their own production at the present time. A remarkable circumstance was that the cost of their production had now fallen to about one-half of what it was in the earlier years, and the prices of private firms might also be expected to fall after a few years' experience.

said, that one result of the Debate had been to draw forth two valuable speeches to which the Committee had listened—from the Secretary for War and the hon. Member who had just sat down. With regard to the first subject, the Government ought to have looked after their Inspectors better than they seemed to have done, and it was to be hoped they were now making certain that nothing of the kind of which complaint had originally been made would occur again. It should be remembered that the viewers and Inspectors who had to pass goods received from contractors into the Service were men in receipt of small wages. A great deal of responsibility attached to their position, and perhaps the Government did not pay them in proportion to the responsibility they placed on their shoulders. It was a point well worth considering whether it would not pay this country to have, not a higher class of men, but men who would be placed by the remuneration given to them even more than above suspicion, and the chance of being "got at" by a contractor. Then he heartily congratulated the Government on the introduction of the eight hours working day. The Government factories were factories into which no foreign competition entered, therefore the system could be tried a great deal more easily there than anywhere else. The Government ought to set an example to other employers of labour. He had often said the Government ought to be model employers of labour; and certainly it would be easier for a Government to retrace its steps if the experiment proved a failure than it would be for a private firm to do so. He did not think there was any chance of their having to retrace their steps, although, no doubt, the men during the first year or two of the change would make a spurt to get through their work with expedition. He was glad, however, to find that the experiment with the Government factories bore out the experiment made by the hon. Member for Salford. As he was talking about the Government being model employers of labour, he should like to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office if it was proposed that War Office factories should be submitted to Home Office or independent inspection? As he understood the hon. Member with regard to Pimlico, he was willing that it should be subjected to outside inspection; but did that apply to Woolwich and Waltham Abbey?

^* : Woolwich is under such inspection and so is Pimlico. I have said nothing about Waltham Abbey; as we are not on that Vote.

Everything manufactured at Waltham Abbey is paid for under this Vote. If there was ever an opportunity for giving an opinion on the matter now is the time.

There will be other things to say about Waltham Abbey, and it will be convenient to deal with all the cases together.

said, he hoped Waltham Abbey would be put under inspection, as they had had one or two lessons there which they would not like to have repeated. He wished to ask for information with regard to the dismissal of Colonel M'Clintock from the Waltham factory—a matter about which he had put a question to the Secretary for War a few days ago. Colonel M'Clintock was in a different position to most artillery officers who were sent to Government factories. As a rule, they went back to their regiments in five years' time just when they had learnt their work at the factory. It was 20 years since Colonel M'Clintock left his regiment, and so he was well versed in manufacturing questions. He (Mr. Hanbury) had asked whether the dismissal of Colonel M'Clintock from the Waltham factory was on account of the remonstrances of that officer to the re-erection of the houses on the same sites as those which were destroyed by the explosion. The information which had reached him, and which was a matter of common rumour, was that Colonel M'Clintock was dismissed for that reason. The answer which the right hon. Gentleman had given was that Colonel M'Clintock had acquiesced in the buildings being re-erected on the same sites. It was a very serious question as to whether these buildings ought to be rebuilt. He had no hesitation in saying that Colonel M'Clintock never acquiesced in the buildings being placed on these sites. However, the buildings were being replaced in a great hurry. Colonel M'Clintock was the one person who could speak with authority as to the advisability of that step, but without consulting him the Government decided upon the re-construction of the buildings. Colonel M'Clintock refused to be responsible for the lives of the workmen, and made a communication to that effect, the result of which was that he was notified that the work must be gone on with, and that if he did not approve of it he must resign. The effect of the Government decision was that because the greatest expert who could be consulted would not acquiesce in the reconstruction of these buildings he was called upon to resign his post. He altogether objected to the proposal that a larger amount of work should be given to the various Government factories on the ground that if that course were adopted a very large amount of work would have to be done in those factories at one time, while a very small amount would have to be done in them at another, and, consequently, large numbers of men who were taken on when there was a press of work would be dismissed and thrown out of employment when the amount of work to be done was reduced. In his opinion, only such an amount of work should be given to the Government factories as would enable a certain number of men to be continuously employed. The rest of the work should be given to private factories. He should like to obtain an assurance from the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War that the fact that the machinery for the manufacture of cordite had been patented by Dr. Anderson would not prevent orders for that article being given to private firms. Of course, he supposed that royalties would have to be paid to Dr. Anderson—

No; Dr. Anderson has no personal interest in cordite machinery.

No; but he is associated with those who have a personal interest in it.

said, the War Office found it essential that some quantity of cordite should be manufactured by private firms, and every facility was given to those private firms who tendered.

said, he should like to know definitely whether he was to understand that tenders had been sent out to and accepted by private firms?

^* replied, that invitations to tender had been sent out, and had been responded to by several private firms.

said, he feared that the litigation which had occurred had involved the country in considerable risk, because while, on the one hand, private firms would not tender, the Government factories were, on the other, closed.

We have got some tenders before us now, and we are going to deal with them.