I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any steps have been taken to assist the escape of foreigners who have fled from the interior to places on the rivers or sea coast of China.

All foreigners have been brought from Wenchow to Shanghai, and a vessel has been hired to bring away refugees from Chung King if necessary. At other Yang-tsze ports there are gunboats, and there are also men-of-war at Woosung held in readiness to proceed to any port where they may be required. Consul-General Warren was empowered on 12th July to take any steps in concert with the senior naval officer which may be considered necessary for bringing away refugees.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Admiralty know the names of the officer, non-commissioned officers, and men who formed the guard at our Legation at Peking, and if so, whether he will notify them to the press, and if the Admiralty have not ascertained the names will he take steps to do so.

The names of the officers attached to the guard of Royal Marines at Peking are:— Captain Lewis S. T. Halliday, H.M.S. "Orlando": Captain Bernard M. Strouts and Captain Edmund Wray, H.M.S. "Centurion," for service at Wei-hai-wei. The relatives have been informed, but the names were not sent to the press. The names of the non-commissioned officers and men are not known. If any certain news is received of the fate of the Peking Legations the Commander-in-Chief may be depended upon to inform the Admiralty by telegraph, but while it is uncertain he naturally does not do so.

Will the Admiralty take stops to ascertain the names?

It is not necessary. The Commander-in-Chief will take the earliest possible steps to communicate the names.

I suppose the hon. Gentleman knows that there is great anxiety?

Yes, Sir; and the Admiralty will take immediate steps to relieve that anxiety. As soon as the Commander-in-Chief has trustworthy news he will, of course, communicate it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the expenses of the 22,000 troops withdrawn from the Indian establishment to servo in China will fall on the Imperial or on the Indian Exchequer; and whether provision will be made, having regard that no fewer than 90,000,000 persons in India are affected by the famine now devastating that dependency of the Crown, that the maintenance of the regiments, native or otherwise, now serving out of India be not charged directly or indirectly on the Indian revenue.

I have on several occasions stated that all the cost, both ordinary and extraordinary, of any Indian troops sent to China would be paid by the the Imperial Exchequer. The number so sent is not 22,000, but less than half that number.

Do I understand that the actual ordinary expenses of the regiment will be paid not by the Indian, but by the Imperial Exchequer? We have had this point raised before, and I want an explicit answer.

I have answered.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state what is the number of Japanese troops now landed or about to land in China.

According to our latest information about 14,000 men had either landed or were en route on 17th July. It is expected that 2,000 more will embark by Sunday next.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary a question of which I have given him private notice— namely, whether Her Majesty's Govern- ment are prepared to enter into engagements with the Viceroys of the Yang-tsze with the view of preserving peace and order in their respective jurisdictions, and whether they had given, or are prepared to give, definite and binding pledges to support the Viceroys.

Her Majesty's Government have, as I have already informed the House, empowered Consul-General Warren to inform the Viceroys that in any efforts they may make to restore order they may count on the full support of Her Majesty's ships. No further pledges of support have been asked for or seem necessary.

In consequence of that answer, I give notice that I will repeat the question on Monday.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether any considerable number of Boers have received medical or surgical assistance in our hospitals, and whether he can state approximately how many; whether any complaints have been received from the Boer Governments, Boer officers, or Boer patients in respect of the medical or surgical services rendered by us, or of the means and appliances provided by us, and whether there is any ground for believing that they have been dissatisfied; whether the medical and hospital assistance requisite for the care of the opposing forces tended by us in addition to our own was foreseen and arranged for; and whether he can state the number of our soldiers who have received medical or surgical aid in Boer hospitals.

Before the question is answered, may I inquire if the third paragraph of the question is not out of order, seeing that it embodies the expression of the opinion that the assistance was requisite?

I wish the hon. Member was never more irregular.

About 450 Boers have been admitted into British hospitals, mostly for gunshot wounds. No complaints have been received. The probability that we might have occasionally to give medical and surgical assistance to Boers was foreseen, and they received the same treatment and attention as our men. There are no Returns showing how many of our soldiers were admitted to Boer hospitals.

I beg to ask the Secretary the the Admiralty whether, on the arrival of the transport "Custodian" at Southampton, complaints were made to the staff officers on duty concerning the food supplied and the moss and canteen arrangements on board during the voyage from Cape Town; and, if so, what report has been made on the subject.

The report of the officer commanding the troops during the voyage in question, which I shall be glad to show the hon. Gentleman, states that there was no cause of complaint in respect of the provisions issued, and that everything appertaining to the comfort of officers and men on board was well carried out. I am also informed that while one man complained to the embarkation officer of everything on board, his comrades did not support him and stated that his allegations did not merit inquiry.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the Queen's regulations for the Transport Service fixing the prices of canteen articles to be supplied to troops on board transport vessels were applicable to the R.M.S. "Avondale Castle," on her voyage from Southampton to Cape Town, between 12th May and 10th June, and, if they were applicable, why these regulations were not adhered to, seeing that the troops on board that vessel were charged a price for aerated waters double that prescribed by the regulations; and will he state what action will be taken by the War Office in the matter, having regard to the observations made by the officer in command in his report on the voyage, and to the possibility that similar non-observances of the regulations may recur.

The owners of the "Avondale Castle" have explained that the overcharge for aerated waters was made by mistake. The amount involved is small, but if the Volunteer battalion applies for its refund the owners will be asked for the money.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he can state if Private P. Walsh, 1st Regiment Munster Fusiliers, who is reported in despatches from Cape Town on Thursday last as having been wounded, is the same Private Walsh who was stated recently to have enlisted when under sixteen years of age; whether he has yet attained that age; and whether, in the event of his having been wounded, he will be sent home by the first available ship, and discharged from the Army with an adequate pension to assist in the support of his mother.

The Private Walsh is the soldier referred to by the hon. Member in his question of the 4th inst. The question of invaliding depends on the severity of the wound. Should his wound lead to his discharge, the amount of his pension will be decided in accordance with regulations by the Chelsea Hospital Commissioners.

Then this is the boy. Will he be sent homo by the first available ship?

I have answered that question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the regulations issued by Colonel Brownrigg, inspecting the Volunteers on the South Denes, Yarmouth, forbidding the Sisters of Nazareth to collect pennies from the 4,000 Volunteers now in camp; whether Colonel Brownrigg has any authority for issuing such regulations; and, if he is aware that the sisterhood who were sent back are of the same order as that which was so highly commended for nursing the sick and wounded in South Africa.

There is no information at the War Office on these incidents. The exclusion or admission of strangers in camp is a matter within the competence of Colonel Brownrigg, as officer commanding the brigade.

Is it the fact that these ladies were excluded in consequence of their religion?

; I have no knowledge of the matter, but if the hon. Gentleman alleges that an unfair distinction has been drawn, and that privileges have been denied to those ladies which were granted to others, I will inquire into it.

I will repeat the question on Monday.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he has any information to the effect that Lord Roberts' army is now hampered by the want of boots, and that a large portion of the troops now under his command are almost barefooted.

In consequence of statements on this subject in the press, the Secretary of State had a telegram of inquiry sent to Lord Roberts on the 14th instant, and the following reply has been received—

"Pretoria, 18th July, 12.55 p.m.—The temporary break in communications and necessity for giving preference to troops and supplies occasioned delay in issue of boots and clothing to some units. The last consignment arrived to-day."

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the intention of the Government to publish Colonel Long's report regarding the abandonment of eleven guns at the battle of Colenso.

I must refer my hon. and gallant friend to the answers which have been given by the First Lord on the general question of the publication of despatches and reports.

May I revive the hon. Gentleman's recollection that last March—

Order, order!

Well, let me put it this way. I will, of course, at once sit down if you rule me out of order. Sir Redvers Buller made a serious attack on Colonel Long—

The hon. Member is putting an obviously irrelevant question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he can state how many men of the 3rd Inniskilling Fusiliers, stationed at Cowshott Manor Camp, responded to the call made in February last to volunteer for service in South Africa; wore any deprivations of privilege made in the case of men who then declined to volunteer; and how many men responded to a further call for Volunteers made upon this corps in the present month, and have any of the corps been visited with displeasure for refusal.

The 3rd Inniskilling Fusiliers were not asked by the Secretary of State for War to volunteer for service abroad either in February or later.

I bog to ask the Under Secretary of State for War how many officers, non-commissioned officers, and men have been invalided from South Africa since the outbreak of the war; of these how many have died on the passage home, or in military hospitals, or in their own homes; and how many have been incapacitated from further service by wounds or disease.

20,658 have been invalided home; of these 63 died on the passage and 60 in military hospitals. There is no record of any having died in their own homes. 430 have been incapacitated from further service by wounds and disease.

Can you give roughly the proportion of officers?

The hon. Member did not ask for it, or I could have given it exactly.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in addition to the military tribunal at Johannesburg, a Court styled the Court of the Chief Magistrate has been appointed over which an officer styled the Chief Magistrate presides; whether this Court has cognisance of and jurisdiction in all criminal cases except murder, treason, sedition, rape, robbery, arson, and concealment of arms; whether the Chief Magistrate is empowered to inflict sentences not exceeding two years imprisonment, fines not exceeding £100, and to sentence to the punishment of flogging, the flogging not to exceed 100 lashes; and whether the Colonial Secretary can give any explanation of the establishment of this tribunal, and on what evidence Sir Alfred Milner, as High Commissioner, has sanctioned the establishment of a tribunal to which the power of sentencing to the lash is entrusted.

I have no information. All the arrangements for preserving law and order in the Transvaal are entirely in the hands of Lord Roberts.

As this is a matter of flogging, will the right hon. Gentleman ask his agent, Sir Alfred Milner?

No, Sir.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any Papers in reference to South Africa, especially in reference to the communications between the Home Government and the Cape Government in regard to the Cape rebels, will be presented before the Colonial Vote is taken.

I hope the Papers will be in the hands of Members before the Colonial Vote is taken.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether there is a commissioned chaplain to the forces at Hong Kong; if not, whether, in view of the importance of Hong Kong as a military base, immediate steps will be taken to appoint one.

Commissioned chaplains are, as a rule, sent only to the larger foreign stations. There is an acting chaplain at Hong Kong who devotes his whole time to the troops. He is at present, however, on leave, and his duties are being discharged by the local clergy. The question of an increase in the establishment of chaplains is under consideration. The House is aware that the Hong Kong garrison has recently been reduced.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the supply of chaplains has been found to be insufficient in the present South African campaign?

There was a time, perhaps, when it was not sufficient, but I believe every demand has now been supplied.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for "War if he can state what number of men are detailed for guards and sentry-go in the metropolis in each twenty-four hours when the battalions and regiments are on home service, and what is the necessity, if any, of posting sentries over empty buildings and public offices when protection could be afforded by the police; and whether the sentry on the War Office was incapacitated by the heat on Tuesday.

There are five officers and 218 non-commissioned officers and men detailed for guards and sentry go in the metropolis. There are no sentries over empty buildings. The matter has been very thoroughly considered and the numbers in recent years have been largely reduced. The sentry on the War Office was unfortunately overcome by the heat on Monday.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a man in a tunic buttoned close up to his throat, and wearing a heavy busby, and carrying a rifle on a beat extending only ten yards, cannot be a very mobile protector?

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state approximately the amount spent upon Belleville boilers for the Navy during the last five years.

It is not possible to state the amount spent upon Belleville boilers, as they are included in the tender for the propelling machinery and are not priced separately.

Has the hon. Gentleman no approximate idea of the cost?

Is it not over £5,000,000?

I can give no other answer. It would involve an examination of all the contracts.

Cannot you say the cost within a million?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Government have been negotiating with the British South Africa Company for the transfer of its territory to the Crown.

No, Sir. I have heard the rumour, but there is not an atom of foundation for the suggestion contained in the question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any, and, if so, what reply has been received to the representations made by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the French Government in July, 1898, that their action in greatly increasing the import duties upon the principal articles of British manufacture was a further infraction of British rights in Madagascar, inconsistent with the international rights of this country, and with the assurances given by the Government of the Republic.

NO direct reply has been received to the representations made in 1898, the French Government having stated that they adhered to the reply upon the subject which was made by Monsieur Hanotaux on the 23rd April, 1897. This reply has already been laid before Parliament.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that, although the Island of Jamaica is now in direct telegraphic communication with the British Empire through British cables by Turks Island, Bermuda, and Halifax (Nova Scotia), no steps have yet been taken to establish a direct communication between Jamaica and the other West Indian Islands, and that the cables connecting Jamaica with the fortified coaling station of St. Lucia and the Islands of Barbados, St. Vincent, and Trinadad, and the other West Indian Islands, as well as the mainland of British Guiana, all touch foreign soil at one or more points; whether he is aware that British Honduras is also dependent upon foreign cables, and that if a colonist in British Honduras wishes to telegraph to the United States or England he has to take a journey into the neighbouring Republics of Guatemala or Spanish Honduras in order to do so; whether the Colonial Office have these matters under consideration; and whether he can hold out any hope of being able to deal speedily with these grievances.

The facts are as stated. The points raised in the hon. Member's question have been carefully considered, and will not be lost sight of. Considerable expenditure would be involved, and I cannot promise any immediate action in the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is now in a position to specify the amounts advanced by the Government of India to the several native States by way of famine loans; whether, when making each loan, the Government of India ascertained that the State was exercising economy in its general administration, with a view both to the relief of the famine-stricken and the repayment of the loan; and whether the Bhaunagar State in Kattywar applied for a famine loan of 30 lakhs, what is the reason why Bhaunagar, recently prosperous, is now in financial straits, and has the Government of India satisfied itself that this State has reduced all unnecessary expenditure both in India and in England.

The total amount of loans to native States for relief purposes sanctioned up to the end of May, either from Government funds or on Government guarantee, was £1,217,000. A list of these loans will be found at the end of the Papers presented to Parliament regarding Famine Relief in Native States, which Papers will, I hope, be distributed before the end of next week. The Government of India has repeatedly inculcated strict economy on native States suffering from famine and applying for financial assistance. Applications for loans to such States and their conduct of relief measures are subjected to such scrutiny and supervision as are possible without undesirable interference. Bhaunagar is undoubtedly a prosperous State, but its Government has recently invested £507,000 in its railways, and had a working cash balance of only £20,000 at the beginning of the year. Owing to the famine, its income has shrunk and its expenditure has increased considerably. The net deficit to be met was estimated in March last at £147,000, and so the State applied for and received a large loan from the Government. The ways and means of the State, its intended expenditure, and the possible economies to be made were considered by the Government of India before the loan was granted.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that in the famine of 1896–7 the Government of the North-West Provinces remitted land revenue to the extent of Rs.6,000,000, while the Government of Bombay remitted Rs.15,000; and whether, looking to the remarks of the Famine Commissioners of 1898, who approved the liberal remissions in the North-West Provinces as mitigating distress, while taking exception to the course followed in Bombay, he will urge upon the Bombay Government a more liberal policy than that followed by them in 1896–7.

In the North-West Provinces, where the population of the affected districts may be taken to have been 19½ millions, the Government during the famine of 1897–8 remitted revenue to the extent of six million rupees; in Bombay, on a population of eight millions, about 800,000 rupees were either remitted or suspended, and 5,300,000 rupees were loaned out to occupiers. The Commissioners point out in their Report that the land revenue assessment of the Bombay Deccan is admittedly light; and, on the whole, I am not prepared to accept without reservation the hon. Member's version of their opinion as to the measures taken in the North West Provinces and in Bombay respectively. So far as the famine is concerned I have every reason to believe that the Bombay Government are acting in a judicious and liberal spirit towards the cultivators under their jurisdiction. In Guzerat alone the Bombay Government report that they had up to July deliberately left uncollected two-thirds of the land revenue in the affected districts.

The noble Lord will understand I am referring to remissions and not suspensions?

Quite so.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has official information to the effect of the telegraphic news received since yesterday of satisfactory rainfalls having taken place in the areas affected by the famine; if so, can he give the total of the rainfall since the monsoon set in up to date in several affected districts, and state if it is regarded as decidedly improving the prospects of the ensuing crops in those parts.

I am glad to say that I have received a report of good rainfalls in most parts of the famine area. The telegram giving this intelligence was dated Simla, the 14th July, and has been published in the newspapers. But I am afraid I cannot at present give precise figures of the rainfall up to date in the several affected districts.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he can state what, approximately, are the percentages of deaths among the cattle in the famine districts, and what funds are available for the supply of cattle, fodder, and seed grain to the cultivators in these districts; and what steps are being taken to secure a supply of fodder for the surviving cattle, and what proportion of the cattle recently supplied to make good previous losses have died from want of fodder.

I have no precise figures about the mortality among cattle. We shall learn some months hence what approximately the losses have been in British districts when the yearly returns are made up of the number of cattle alive. No similar returns are made for native States. The funds at present allotted for the supply of seed grain and cattle to cultivators in British districts are 123 lakhs for advances to cultivators. The charitable funds have also distributed for the same purpose a considerable sum to the poorer cultivators. Strenuous efforts were made in parts of the Bombay Presidency to collect and distribute fodder earlier in the season. Now that rain has come and grass is growing I do not anticipate that further endeavours in that direction will be required. I am not able to say what proportion of the recently supplied cattle have perished from lack of fodder or from lack of water.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the outbreak of cholera in the famine districts of India, any, and, if so, what, addition has been made to the famine medical service; and whether he can state the number of deaths from cholera in the famine districts.

I am not able to state the number of additional medical officers and medical subordinates sent to the famine districts in consequence of the outbreak of cholera. I was informed that, as regards the worst cholera tract in the middle of June, the local authorities there had received as much extra medical help as they thought necessary. The returns which have reached me show that during the month of June 22,198 cholera deaths were reported from British famine districts, and there were 19,122 from native States similarly afflicted. During the three weeks ending on the 7th July, the reported cholera deaths averaged 6,562 a week for British famine districts and 6,185 a week for native States affected by famine.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, looking to the loyalty and patience manifested by the Indian people while suffering from grievous calamities, and looking to the benefit to Imperial interests from such manifestation at the present time, he will consider whether, by withdrawing recent penal legislation, this loyalty may be recognised, and the Indian people assured of the confidence and appreciation of Her Majesty's Government.

The loyalty, courage, and resignation manifested by the Indian people in the face of most grievous calamities are most fully appreciated by Her Majesty's Government and by the people of this country, and on more than one occasion both the Viceroy in India and I, as Secretary of State in England, have given unstinted expression to our admiration of their demeanour and conduct. I do not know what the hon. Member means by withdrawal of recent penal legislation, for certainly during my tenure of office no such legislation has been sanctioned.

Does not the noble Lord understand that I refer to the law with regard to the press and sedition, which now appear not to be necessary?

If the hon. Baronet will be good enough to examine that law I think he will find it exactly the same as that which obtains in this country.

Remember the case of the Natu Brothers.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will grant a Return showing the amount yielded by new taxation imposed in India in or since the year 1866, and stating in each case the purpose for which such taxation was at the time said to be imposed.

There is no objection to the motion for the Return which the hon. Baronet desires.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India how long has the office of Commander-in-Chief in India been vacant, and when is an appointment to be made.

Sir W. Lockhart died suddenly on the 18th of March, and since then General Sir Power Palmer has discharged, as acting Commander-in-Chief, the functions of the office. A permanent appointment will be made before long.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the coinage of five-shilling and four-shilling pieces is to be continued, and whether he can state if any representations have been made by retail traders as to the inconvenience of these coins.

The coinage of double florins has been discontinued since 1891. Those remaining in circulation are in course of withdrawal. No representation as to the inconvenience of crowns is recorded as having been received at the Mint or the Treasury. Only a very small proportion of the silver pieces issued is in crowns. In 1899, out of an issue of 32,129,100 of such pieces, only 159,100 were crowns. It is not proposed to discontinue their issue.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the reasons why income derived from payments for interest made by municipal authorities is charged with the full duty of 1s. in the pound for the whole period in respect of which the same is payable, whereas income derived from similar payments made by public companies or private persons is calculated at the increased rate only since the date when the increased duty was imposed.

The distinction, which leads to a difference of treatment in respect of income tax, between income derived from payments for interest made by municipal authorities, and income derived from similar payments made by public companies or private persons, lies in the fact that in the latter case the interest is paid out of profits and gains assessable to income tax, while in the former it is (as a rule) paid, or partly paid, out of rates, which are not so assessable. In this latter event Sub-section 3 of Section 24 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888, applies, and this distinctly prescribes that the rate of income tax shall be that in force at the time of payment. I may be allowed to add I think that some public inconvenience is caused by the existing difference of treatment in this matter, and I propose to examine the possibility of adopting a uniform system.

Will regard be had to the case where there is obviously a charge in excess, like the Jamaica railway debentures?

No. I do not think that was a case of excessive charge.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state how many persons are at present detained as debtors in Her Majesty's gaols, whether under the prison rules such persons are obliged to wear prison uniform, and whether their treatment as to food, exercise, and such matters differs in any particular from those convicted of criminal offences.

There were 474 male and eleven female debtors in custody on the 17th instant. Debtors are permitted to wear their own clothing unless it is unfit for use, in which case they wear the same uniform as prisoners awaiting trial whose clothes are unfit for use. They have the same food as offenders of the first division, and are allowed to exercise twice a day. Generally speaking, their treatment differs in almost every particular from that of convicted prisoners.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state whether the Metropolitan Police Force is at present below its establishment, also whether desirable recruits are now forthcoming in sufficient numbers and continue to remain in the force.

The force is at present below its establishment chiefly owing to the Reservists being called out for service with the colours. A sufficient number of properly qualified recruits is forthcoming to rather more than meet the normal needs of the force, but not sufficient to replace the absent Reservists or to make good augmentations. The answer to the last few words of the question is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, seeing that undelivered postcards are returned to the senders only on the condition that a request for their return must be placed on the outside before posting, and on the payment of a return postage of one halfpenny on delivery, while undelivered letters are returned to the senders without any extra charge or request for their return, whether he can say why postcards are differently dealt with, and which side of a postcard the Post Office authorities describe as the inside.

These postcards are treated differently from letters, because the half- penny post is not in itself remunerative, and in the great majority of cases the return to the sender of undeliverable matter passing at the halfpenny rate is not desired and involves much useless labour. Such packets can be returned, if the sender so desires, by placing on the address side a request to that effect. The official regulations make no reference to the "inside" of a postcard.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, in view of the amount of overtime performed by the staff at the Central Telegraph Office, London, the Postmaster General is considering the advisability of increasing the number of operators; whether it is intended that such increase should be effected by the addition of unestablished telegraphists at lower wages than the ordinary clerks receive; and, whether the Postmaster General will take steps to provide that all new telegraphists shall be placed in a position with reference to pay and other rights similar to that of the present established staff of the London office.

The Postmaster General is considering the advisability of adding to the staff in the Central Telegraph Office in order to reduce overtime, but it is not intended that unestablished telegraphists should be employed for that purpose. Officers appointed to the established class of telegraphists will receive the pay and privileges proper to that class.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he has examined the correspondence which passed in 1897 and 1898 relative to the appointment of the previous postmistress of Cootehill, county Cavan; and, whether, seeing that a condition requiring her to give up her private business was attached to the appointment, he can state why a similar condition was not attached to the appointment of the present postmaster; and whether he is at liberty to say on the authority of what official his recent statement was made.

There was no condition attached to Miss Corry's appointment such as the hon. Member describes. Miss Corry had no private business, but resided with her relative, the previous sub-postmistress of Cootehill, to whom she acted as assistant. The newly appointed sub-postmaster is not required to give his whole time to the public service, and it is not necessary, therefore, that he should relinquish his business as chemist. My recent reply was given on the authority of the Postmaster General.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that the late postmistress at Newbliss, county Monaghan, still resides in the post office in that town, notwithstanding that her successor was appointed several months ago; and can he state who is the tenant of the Newbliss Post Office, and if the late postmistress is still the tenant, is that arrangement in accordance with General Post Office practice; and will he say how many females are employed there as telegraph practitioners or learners, and whether complaints have been made to the chief postmaster in Dublin that some of these young women are occasionally employed as postal messengers; and how many persons altogether, male and female, are employed in connection with this post office, and how many are Roman Catholics.

The fact is as stated. The late sub-postmistress of Newbliss still resides in the house in which the post office is situated, and there is no objection, under the rules of the Department, to her so doing. The present sub-postmistress is the tenant of the premises. One female assistant and one female telegraph learner are employed at the Newbliss office; and the services of these persons are occasionally utilised in the delivery of telegrams. It is not known that any complaints have been made against this practice, which is not in violation of any rule. The total number of persons employed in connection with the Newbliss office is nine—six men and three women. Nothing is known as regards their religion.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the death of Dr. Nadin, Tipperary, who was doctor to the Royal Irish. Constabulary at various stations, the men in each barrack were asked to choose a successor, and their choice was ratified in every case except Tipperary and Limerick Junction, where the police, thirty-four in number, almost unanimously selected Dr. O'Dwyer, but that in this case the County Inspector intervened and recommended a practitioner who had only received one or two votes, and that Dr. O'Dwyer was then set aside by the Inspector General and the position given to the nominee of the County Inspector, although his qualifications were in no respect superior; and will he explain why the wishes of the force were not allowed to prevail in this case as in that of all the other vacancies created by the death of Dr. Nadin.

I am informed it is not the fact that the police at any of the stations in question were asked to choose a successor to Dr. Nadin. The gentleman selected for appointment at Tipperary and Limerick has been longer in practice than Dr. O'Dwyer, and had also attended the police on previous occasions when the late medical attendant was unable to do so, and had given every satisfaction. While of course every attention is given, as far as possible, to the wishes of the constabulary in a matter of this kind, the choice of a medical attendant is not with the men, and the rule is to appoint the most experienced and most suitable doctor.

Do I understand that in the other cases no steps were taken to consult the wishes of the police?

I do not know how far their wishes were consulted. Whatever was done was done in an informal manner.

However informal, is it not the fact that in all cases, except that of Tipperary, the wishes of the constabulary were met?

That I cannot say.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state the annual profit received by the Government from letting the Phoenix Park for grazing cattle, and whether any of the London parks are similarly let; is he aware that the bullocks in the Phoenix Park are not herded, but continually stray on the roads and paths, to the annoyance of the public; that filth from the cattle disfigures the walks; that they are allowed to trample down and dirt that portion of the sward of the park most used for games by the citizens; and that in the London parks sheep are introduced whenever it is necessary to eat down the grass; and whether any steps will be taken, by efficient herding, to prevent the Phoenix Park roads and walks from being obstructed and defiled by cattle.

The average annual receipts from grazing rents in the Phoenix Park during the past five years wore £626 3s. 4d. There is no grazing in St. James's Park, but £64 a year is received for grazings in Hyde Park and the Green Park. No complaint has been received from the public with regard to the bullocks. The size of the park renders it impossible to prevent completely the straying of cattle on the roads, but every effort is made to keep the cattle off the roads (especially the main road) and preserve the cleanliness of the walks. No serious inconvenience with regard to games has arisen, and no complaint has been made. Sheep are introduced into some of the London parks to eat down the grass. A similar plan was tried in Dublin some years ago, but the grass did not suit sheep.

Are herds employed to keep the cattle off the path?

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will explain why Mr. R. W. Garden, the successful candidate at the recent examination for the situation of assistant surveyor of buildings in the Architectural Department of the Board of Public Works, Ireland, after having received notice of his success, has been re- jected, although his qualifications fulfil the requirements set out in the special regulations issued by the Civil Service Commission on 27th April, 1900, respecting such examination; and whether it is proposed to appoint Mr. Donaldson because he happens to be at the present time in the temporary service of the Department.

Mr. Carden was rejected because his qualifications did not fulfil the requirements to which the hon. Member refers. They were prima, facie satisfactory; but they did not bear close investigation. No appointment will be made on the result of the examination.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—1. Have any representations been made to him about the state of the law in Ireland in relation to the use of traction engines on public roads. 2. Is he aware that owing to the use of such engines on the coast road between Glen-arm and Lame the road authority finds the cost of maintenance so materially increased as to be a source of embarrassment, while no power exists by which they can oblige the owners of the engines to contribute to the cost of repairs to the road. 3. Is he aware that the County Antrim Grand Jury passed resolutions calling upon the Government to assimilate the law in Ireland to that of England in regard to the passage of traction engines along public roads, complaining at the same time that the owners of these engines carry on their traffic under most illegal conditions 4. And will he introduce a clause into his Bill to amend the Local Government (Ireland) Act, placing the law in Ireland upon the same footing with the law in England.

Representations have been made to me of the character mentioned in the first paragraph. The average expenditure on the coast road between Glenarm and Larne has been increased about 30 per cent. within recent years; I am unable to say whether this increased expenditure has resulted in any embarrassment as alleged, but, if so, the case would appear to be one in which an application for an extension of the limit under Section 27, Subsection 2, of the Local Government Act, 1898, would probably be entertained by the Local Government Board. The answer to the third paragraph is in the affirmative. The Amendment suggested in the last paragraph would not be covered by the title of the Bill now before the House. Under Section 23 of the. Highways and Locomotives Act, 1878, as amended by Section 12 of the Locomotives Act, 1898, damages can be recovered by the local authority in England in respect of excessive wear on highways by reason of extraordinary traffic. These enactments do not, however, apply to Ireland, but I will consider the question of assimilating the law in this respect in the two countries with a view to possible legislation in a future session.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he can state what has been the annual expenditure for the past ten years on Kew Gardens, London, and the Botanical Gardens, Dublin.

The total gross expenditure from 1890–1 to 1899–1900 was —On Kew Gardens, £261,408 5s. 10d.; on the Botanical Gardens, Glasnevin, £18,769 6s. 1d.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to consult the Secretary for the Colonies as to the desirability of making an extra grant for the Botanical Gardens, Dublin?

Give us some orchids.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the effort to represent the passing of the Bill to extend the time for the completion of the Great Northern Tramway from Sutton to Howth as an exoneration of the manner in which the work has up to the present been done; and whether, before sanctioning an inspection of the line by his inspectors, he will obtain an undertaking from the company that fresh Parliamentary powers will be applied for, or else enforce compliance with the original Act prescribing that the tramway shall be laid along the road and with its rails on a level therewith.

The company state that if Parliamentary powers are necessary to authorise the deviation which has been made at the request of the grand jury, they will take an early opportunity of applying for them. In the meantime, the Board of Trade do not think it would be in the public interest to decline to allow an inspection for the purpose of ascertaining whether the line can be safely worked.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will receive a deputation with a view of giving a grant of money or providing a means for giving such grant, for the construction of a railway from Listowel via Newtown Sandes and Ballylongford to Tarbert; and whether, in view of the fact that a portion of the district is congested, and of the want of travelling facilities as well as of employment to the poor, he will favourably consider the request made.

There are no funds available for the construction of a railway from Listowel to Tarbert, and therefore no useful purpose would be served by my receiving a deputation, as suggested in the question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman receive a deputation?

Order, order! That is exactly the question the right hon. Gentleman has answered.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large number of meetings can be held in North Kerry calling on the Government to make a grant?

Can the right hon. Gentleman not find a slice of the Church Fund for this purpose?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of police employed in protecting the farm in Derry situate near Listowel, the property of John Sands, and whether the police so employed cost the district £160 per year; and, if not, how much; and whether, having regard to the present condition of the district, the extra police so employed on this farm will be removed.

Two constables are employed in protecting the caretaker on the farm referred to. They will be removed when, in the opinion of the authorities locally responsible, the necessity no longer exists for their employment. The men are supplied from the free force of the county, consequently their employment entails no charge whatever either to the district or the county.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole duty those men have to perform is to arrest the emergency man and charge him with drunkenness?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that an annual sum of £200 has been voted from 1865 to 1891 to the Royal Irish Academy as salary to an Irish scribe, including cataloguing and printing Irish manuscripts, and that a like sum has been included in the general grant-in-aid voted to the said Academy between 1892 and 1899; whether the transcription of Celtic manuscripts ceased on the death, in 1880, of Mr. O'Longan, the last of the Irish scribes, whether the copying of Irish manuscripts since 1880 has been by photograph, and whether the photographing of old Irish manuscripts ceased with the completion of the Yellow Book of Leccan in 1895; and, if so, can he say what has been done with the £200 a year voted for Irish scribes since 1880, and the £200 a year for printing Celtic manuscripts since 1893; whether the proceeds of the sale of the four folio volumes facsimiled or photographed at the expense of Parliament have been refunded to Her Majesty's Treasury, or spent on the general purposes of the Royal Irish Academy; and whether, if the Royal Irish Academy be unwilling to publish Celtic manuscripts, he will consider the desirability of transferring the present annual grants for this purpose to some of the other existing antiquarian societies in Ireland.

The sum of £200 was voted from 1865 to 1870for "Salary of Irish Scribe and for Cataloguing and. Printing Irish Manuscripts," and from l871 to 1890 for "Researches in connection with Celtic Manuscripts." In the Estimates for 1890ߝ1 and up to 1896ߝ7 this special item was merged in a grant of £400 for "Researches into and publication of Celtic Manuscripts." Since 1897ߝ8 the grant to the Academy has been voted as a lump sum, but the Academy have from year to year allocated a similar amount to such researches. Since the death of Mr. O'Longan in 1880 the manuscripts have been reproduced by photo-lithography, and the last one published was the Yellow Book of Leccan in 1895. The proceeds of the facsimiles published by the Academy have never been refunded to the Treasury. The receipts from the five volumes of "Facsimiles of National Manuscripts of Ireland," published by the Stationery Office, were, of course, paid into the Exchequer. The Academy is anxious to continue the publication of Celtic MSS. But it has full discretion as to the disposal of its grant-in-aid, and recently it has devoted its income mainly to collecting material, for a Thesaurus of the Irish language, which will be a most important aid to the study of the texts themselves.

What are the researches to which this sum has been, devoted during the last few years?

To the preparation, of a dictionary of the Irish language.

Will that dictionary-be published before the end of next, century?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the governors of the asylum of Monaghan demanded from the County Council of Monaghan £6,500 last week for sewerage and other works, and that the county council, not knowing of this expenditure at the asylum, struck a rate that will leave the council in debt several hundred pounds at the end of the year if they have to pay this claim of the asy- lum governors; and whether he will inquire if this work is necessary, and provide that the governors of the asylum will in future give notice to the County Council of Monaghan before making such an outlay.

This question appears to be founded upon a misapprehension of the facts. The governors of the asylum have not demanded a sum of £6,500 from the county council for the works referred to. The joint committee of the asylum, which includes a certain number of members of the Monaghan County Council, applied to the Local Government Board for sanction to two loans, one of £6,500 for sewerage and other works, and another of £2,500 for building a new church. Advertisements were issued by the joint committee in newspapers circulating in the district inviting any ratepayer or owner of property desirous of making a representation to the Local Government Board in connection with the proposed loans, to do so within fourteen days. No objection was received by the Board, and they have accordingly sanctioned the loans—to be repaid in thirty and forty years respectively. The proportion of the amount of the two loans of £9,000 for which the county Monaghan is liable is £3,872, the county Cavan being liable for the remainder. A printed copy of the notice of the proposal to apply for these loans was sent to every representative of the county council acting on the joint committee of management of the asylum on 14th January last, in compliance with the regulations made by the Local Government Board on the subject.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the ordinary police force at Sneem, county Kerry, has been increased lately; and if so, what is the cause of the increase; whether Mr. Warden has now or had at any time lately police protecting his house; and if so, on what grounds; and whether, considering the present condition of the district of Sneem, he will make representations to have the extra police force withdrawn.

The ordinary police force at Sneem has recently been augmented by five men to enable better protection by patrols to be given to a caretaker in the locality. Mr. Warden receives protection because such protection is considered necessary. These additional constables cannot be withdrawn until their services are no longer required.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 50 per cent. of the tenants on this estate are excluded from the benefits of the Land Act by the recent action of this landlord

And is he aware that the magistrates in petty sessions have signed a petition for the withdrawal of these men?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has seen a copy of a memorandum issued by the National Teachers Association of Ireland, in reference to certain provisions contained in the proposed new rules and regulations issued by the Commissioners of National Education, and the probable injury to the cause of primary education; and whether, in view of the fact that the extract from said rules was only issued a few days ago, the Government will delay their adoption of them for a period of about six months, in order to give the managers of schools and the school teachers an opportunity of considering their effect on the system of primary education in Ireland.

I have not yet seen the memorandum referred to, but I had the opportunity yesterday of an interview with a deputation of Irish national teachers on the subject of the new rules. The answer to the second paragraph is in the negative; the Government have no such power, nor do I think it would be desirable to exercise it if they had.

How long must the rules be on the Table of the House before they receive the sanction of Parliament?

They do not require the sanction of Parliament. They are already in force.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he will state what is the scale of remuneration to be paid to teachers in the national schools of Ireland for extra subjects, sanctioned only out of school hours, a list of which is issued by the Commissioners of National Education.

The scale of remuneration and mode of payment for extra branches have not yet been determined by the Commissioners.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether gratuities for the instruction of monitors will be paid to Irish national teachers as usual this year, and when will the result of their examination be made known to those monitors who attended the examinations hold during last Easter week at the different district centres.

Gratuities due on account of monitors' instruction for the past year will be paid to the teachers in all cases. The results of their examination at Easter will be made known to the monitors without delay.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state whether county surveyors and deputy county surveyors are compelled under the Local Government (Ireland) Act to devote their whole time to the service and work of the county councils in Ireland; and, whether the office of county surveyor and deputy county surveyor are pensionable offices or otherwise.

Existing county and assistant county surveyors hold their office on the same terms and conditions as heretofore. County councils cannot prohibit them from undertaking private practice if they are able to do so without neglecting the duties of their office. I understand, however, that since the passing of the Local Government Act, 1898, the surveyors have little or no time for private practice owing to their increased duties. In the case of new appointments there would be nothing to prevent councils from stipulating that the persons appointed should devote their entire time to their duties. The offices of county surveyor and assistant surveyor are pensionable, the former under 38 and 39 Vict., c. 56, and the latter under Section 83, Sub-section 11, of the Act of 1898. But no surveyor appointed after the passing of the Act of 1875 can obtain a superannuation allowance unless he has given his whole time to the service of the county, and assistant surveyors must also devote their whole time to the service of the county to qualify for superannuation allowance.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can say when it is intended to consider whether any and what change should be made in Parliamentary procedure, so that notices of Motions may not prevent the House discussing questions of urgency or importance. I also desire to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, as Members of the House generally are deprived of the opportunity of moving any Amendments in the case of Bills which are reported without Amendment by Standing Committees, he will consider the expediency of such an alteration in the mode of procedure as will secure that all Bills reported from a Standing Committee, whether amended or not, shall be considered on Report in the House.

I think the hon. Member will agree that at the present period of the session these are subjects which it is impossible for us to take up.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can give the assurance that an opportunity will be given for considering the Vote for the Local Government Board in Committee of Supply.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will state when the Local Government Board Vote will be taken.

When will the Board of Trade Vote be taken?

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can give the House long notice of the day on which the Supplementary Vote for the war in South Africa will be proposed.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will state the business for next Monday?

I propose to put down the Local Government Board Vote and the Board of Trade Vote on the two remaining allotted days for Supply. I cannot put them first, and whether they will be reached depends on what view the House takes of the relative importance of the questions that arise. The Army Votes are down, but they will not be put first. As to the Supplementary Vote for the war in South Africa, I hope that it will be taken to-morrow week. I am unable to give an absolutely certain answer, because my scheme has been upset by the uncertainty as to whether the Papers promised by the Colonial Secretary will be in the hands of hon. Members by Tuesday, on which day I had proposed to take the Colonial Vote. I have put down the Foreign Office Vote second. That, I think, will be a convenient arrangement, but it cannot be maintained if the promised Papers are not in the hands of hon. Members. I will defer a statement on that point until my right hon. friend can inform me on the question. On Monday the Government will take the Military Bills. I am not certain whether the Companies Bill will be down from the Grand Committee, but whether or not that is the case, I think it would be rather short notice for the Bill to be taken. The Military Lands Bill will be taken first, and afterwards the other Military Bills which were advanced a stage yesterday. T hope to put down the Naval Reserve Bill on the same day.

What is the alternative business for Tuesday?

I have not had time to consider that.

Will another day be given to Army Votes?

No; they have already been discussed. I cannot put them down as first Order.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can state approximately the amount of money to be asked for in the Supplementary Estimate in connection with the war in South Africa; and also approximately what portion of the estimated gross cost of the war in South Africa will Ireland have to contribute.

I am not yet in a position to state what is the amount of the Estimate.

I will put the question again Tomorrow.

This Bill is introduced with special regard to the recommendations of the Viceregal Commission appointed to inquire into the system of intermediate education in Ireland. That Commission made a very thorough inquiry into the whole subject; it took a large amount of evidence, and ultimately brought in a valuable and unanimous Report. It is not necessary that I should describe minutely the conclusions at which it arrived, but, speaking generally, it reported in the direction of attaching loss importance to individual results and more importance to tests of general efficiency as the measure of the grant that should be made to a school. How far legislation is necessary to give effect to its recommendation is a doubtful matter; on one point certainly it is requisite, and I think we may take it for granted that the Commissioners would not be willing to give effect generally to the recommendations which they made in the absence of special legislation clearly enabling them to do so. The Bill proposes to give powers of a general character to the Board—powers which will enable them to apply portions of the funds at their disposal for the promotion of secondary education in a manner provided by rules to be made by the Board with the approval of the Lord Lieutenant. It has been deliberately drafted in that form because it seemed to the Government that the provisions of Clause 2 would give sufficient safeguards against any abuse of the powers so conferred; but, in addition, it was thought desirable to give them greater freedom than they would possess if their policy was absolutely limited and circumscribed to the recommendations made in the body of the Report. I am still of opinion that the Bill in that form would be a more useful measure than one limited to the recommendations of the Committee, because it is impossible to say definitely the direction which fresh educational developments may take. Just as since 1878 considerable difference has become apparent in the opinions of those interested in education, so in the next twenty years similar differences may arise. But it has been intimated to mo that in its present form the Bill might prove contentious, and that the element of contention might be removed if in the Committee stage the Government were prepared to introduce Amendments confining the scope of the Bill to the recommendations actually made by the Commissioners. In the circumstances I shall be prepared to make that concession to the objectors to the Bill, and having given that intimation I trust that the Second Heading of the Bill will be taken without very much further discussion. The measure will constitute an important stop, not only in the cause of secondary education in Ireland, but in the cause of education generally in Ireland.

The circumstances under which the Bill has been brought to a Second Reading are such as will probably prevent any great contention over its provisions. A Bill dealing with this subject cannot, however, be disposed of in a few minutes; there must be some reasonable discussion of the subject. I do not think it would be possible for a more important and interesting subject connected with Ireland to be brought before the House. It is now some twenty years since the intermediate system of education was established in Ireland, and ample time has elapsed to enable the Irish people generally to judge of its merits and demerits, and, with regard to the system, the public opinion of Ireland has come to three clear conclusions. I believe that public opinion has come almost unanimously to the conclusion that, looking at the system broadly, it has worked a very great deal of good in the secondary education of the country. It has certainly put an end to the apathy and stagnation which prevailed in Irish schools twenty-five years ago. Interest in the school work has quickened, and emulation has been stimulated and improved. Boys at school work with a keener zest than they did twenty-five years ago, and the standard of secondary education has been greatly improved in every school throughout the country. Not the least valuable feature of the system is that it has enabled high-class secondary education to be imparted to the children of poorer parents—education which it was very difficult for them to obtain before the intermediate system was introduced. The Irish people under these circumstances are prepared to admit that the system has been of enormous benefit. But it is equally clear to them that this intermediate system has grave defects which have been apparent to everybody, and I say the fact that we have had to wait over twenty years for a remedy for these defects points to the most serious defect of all—the centralised and irresponsible educational control which has been set up. The Board of Education which exercises control over the education of the country consists of seven gentlemen, and although I dislike intensely alluding unnecessarily to any question of religion, I feel bound to point out that of these seven gentlemen four are Protestants and three Catholics, and it seems rather a strange thing that Protestants should preponderate on a Board which is administering education to boys the overwhelming majority of whom are Catholics. This Board is exclusively appointed by the Government, and its history for the last twenty years shows that it has been for the most part absolutely out of touch with educational opinion in Ireland. Certainly the headmasters of the schools in Ireland have had no voice whatever in the management of examinations or any other matter connected with the work of the Department. I believe it is not overstating the case to say that for the most of those twenty odd years, certainly for the last ten years, no member of the Board has had any personal experience whatever of secondary education in Ireland. I think that is a system thoroughly unsound. The gravest defect of all is that the constitution of this educational control is wrong. It is, I believe, without parallel in any country in Europe. I do not think there is another instance in Europe of an educational board of this kind which has not associated with it a consultative council, upon which the opinions of practical educationists are represented. I do not pretend to be completely familiar with the educational systems of Europe, but I do not believe that in any country there is an Education Board appointed by the Government having no association with practical education, as happens to be the case in Ireland. Even here in England —England that is always so slow to move in these matters—this Continental system was adopted last year. An Education Act was passed for England which created a consultative council, to consist, so far as two-thirds of its members were concerned, of persons qualified to represent the views of universities and other bodies interested in education. The first consultative council includes such authorities as Mr. Dyke Acland, Sir William Anson, Mrs. Sophy Bryant, Sir William Hart Dyke, Professor Michael Foster, Professor Jebb, Mr. Ernest Gray, Professor Owens, and others. With such a precedent, surely a similar system might be extended to Ireland, and you might give us a consultative council charged with the duty of advising the Board on educational matters. We have a precedent nearer at home. I see the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the South Division of the County of Dublin in his place. Last year a measure was passed constituting the Department of which he is the head, and a provision was inserted in it for the creation of a consultative council to advise him on matters of technical education. The principle having, therefore, been adopted in England, and to a certain extent in Ireland, I submit that it should be extended to the Intermediate Education Board, as until that is done that Board will continue, as it is, I believe, to-day, to be very largely out of touch with educational opinion throughout the country. This is a reform which, for my part, I feel sure is bound to come in the very near future. This Bill, however, does not propose any reform of this character at all. As the right hon. Gentleman has most frankly stated, it, on the contrary, confers new and enlarged powers on this centralised and irresponsible Board. As it is drawn, it enormously increases the powers of the Board, and if it be passed as it stands it will give for all time to the Board of Intermediate Education, however it may be constituted in the future, absolute power to spend its endowments in any way it likes. That is a proposal which I certainly cannot agree to, neither do I believe that the Irish Members of this House will assent to it. If the constitution of the board were amended in the way I have suggested, by associating with it a consultative council, then the objection to giving enlarged powers to this Board would almost entirely disappear; but so long as the Board is constituted as at present I believe Irish representatives would be false to their duty, and false to the best interests of education in Ireland, if they agreed to pass a measure such as this, giving the Board absolute plenary powers. This Board may or may not command public confidence. Nobody can tell what its constitution in the future may be, and it certainly seems a rather startling proposi- tion that we should be asked to give it a blank cheque to enable it to do as it likes henceforward. This Bill proposes to give power to the Board to interfere, not merely with the results of education, but also with the methods of education in every school in Ireland. The schools, in fact, will have absolutely no voice whatever, and therefore I say that in my opinion it would be a most unwise and foolish thing for the Irish representatives to give the Board power to carry out Amendments in their system of which we know nothing, and which will not be submitted for our judgment. I therefore cannot agree to the Bill passing in its present form. With its main object, however, I am in perfect accord. That object is plain. The history of this intermediate system is in many respects most curious. For upwards of twenty years public opinion has been clamouring for a. change in the Education Board, and the anti-reform section of that Board, if I may so call in, has been successful in preventing any reform whatever. At last, by the exertions of some members of the Board, it was induced to ask the Lord Lieutenant for an inquiry into the present system, and the House will be amused when I recall the fact that the inquiry that the Board asked for was to be one directed by itself; in other words the Board of Intermediate Education asked that members of its own body should be appointed a Commission to inquire into the defects or the merits of the system it was administering. The Intermediate Education Commission which sat was, therefore, a Commission consisting only of members of the Board of Intermediate Education itself The inquiry, though hold under such disadvantageous circumstances, still proved most valuable. It was held in the light of day, and by the very force of circumstances the Board were obliged to examine as witnesses all those associated most closely with educational interests in Ireland, with the result that evidence was given on every part of the system, and the greatest possible light let in as to its merits on the one side, and its defects on the other. The Commission—rather to my surprise, I confess, knowing some of the elements on the Board—unanimously agreed to a Report of a most valuable character, setting forth a number of very important reforms—reforms for which people have been clamouring for a great many years past. It would not be right for me to attempt to make this an opportunity for any prolonged consideration of the Report, hut I might say in passing that I think the Government ought to give Irish Members a proper opportunity of discussing the recommendations in that Report. Those recommendations, when they become new rules under this Bill, will have to be laid upon the Table of the House for a certain number of days; but we know by experience that that does not mean a proper and adequate opportunity for discussing matters of that sort. They will come on late at night when there is no real opportunity for discussion, and I think it will be only fair if I ask the right hon. Gentleman on behalf of the Government to give us some sort of understanding that before the forty days, or whatever may be the number of days during which the rules are to lie on the Table elapse, a fair opportunity should be given for their consideration. If we have no such prospect before us I am afraid we will be driven to consider and discuss them on this Bill—a course which will be inconvenient and not in the interest of the passage of the measure. All I have to say may be summed up in two or three sentences. The chief complaint against the system of intermediate education in Ireland was that it led merely to a training of the memory, that it did not train the intellect, that it simply crammed the mind. The system of competition and the system of exclusively written examinations were very largely regarded as the causes of the deplorable results which undoubtedly have followed. I regard the first three recommendations of the Report as of enormous importance. The provision as to the two courses will enable boys to obtain the advantage of the system by training themselves more on a commercial than on a literary or a classical basis, and the first two provisions are calculated to put an end to the system of cramming, which undoubtedly has had very bad effects in the working of the system in Ireland. Equally important from this point of view is the recommendation which provides in certain cases for viva voce as well as written examinations, and in certain circumstances that the test of the efficiency of a school should not be solely, as heretofore, the results of the examinations, but should depend upon a certain modified inspection. These are some of the main recommendations in the Report, and it would be very foolish for anyone interested in secondary education in. Ireland to throw any obstacle in the way of those recommendations being carried into effect. I must, however, take this opportunity of expressing the deep regret universally entertained in Ireland that there is nothing in the Report dealing with the study of Irish. Some years ago the marks allotted to Irish in the programme of the Intermediate Board were suddenly, and without any valid reason being given, reduced, and they are to day considerably below those awarded for French, German, or other languages. It is a monstrous thing that the language of the country, the ancient language of Ireland, should in this way be proscribed in the system of intermediate education, and that it should be on a lower level than the languages of the Continent. If it were in my power, I would be delighted to have an opportunity of moving some Amendment that would insert in the new rules which will be based on these recommendations, a. provision that the marks for Irish should be raised to the standard at which they stood before, or at least be equal to. those given for French or German. Let me, however, briefly sum up the position I take on this Bill. I am quite willing—I am anxious—that the Board should have given to them the necessary powers to carry out the recommendations of their own Report, and if the Bill is amended in the direction indicated by the right hon. Gentleman so as to limit these powers to carrying out those recommendations, I think it will be the duty of Irish representatives not only not to throw any obstacle in the way of this Bill, but to facilitate its passage into law. I have drafted an Amendment on this subject, which I propose to put on the Paper, and a copy of which I have handed to the Government. I do not ask for any pledge that the Government will accept the precise terms of that Amendment, but I do expect the right hon. Gentleman to give us a pledge that in Committee an Amendment carrying out the substance of my proposal will be either proposed or accepted by the Government. My suggested Amendment runs in this way—

"And so far as may be required, in order to carry into effect the several recommendations contained in the Report of the Intermediate Education Commission presented to Parliament in 1899, may from time to time apply a portion of the funds placed at the disposal of the Board," and so on.

The Bill, as it stands, enables them in future to dispose of the money under their control in any way they like, while the Amendment I suggest limits their power to the spending of the money in the carrying out of those particular re-commendations embodied in the Report, which are before us, and of which we approve. I understood the right hon. Gentleman to promise that he would accept in substance that Amendment, and on that understanding I hope the Bill will be passed into law. I may be asked why, if I take so strong a view as I have expressed about the constitution of this Board, should I agree to enlarge its powers at all? The answer is very plain. We all want the constitution of the Board altered, and I am strongly in favour of associating with it such a consultative council as exists elsewhere. But I have to ask myself—are we, therefore, to postpone all the reforms for which we have asked and waited for the last twenty years? We desire to see the recommendations of this Report carried into effect, and the only way they can be carried into effect is by passing this Bill with the alteration I have suggested. I should, therefore, on the understanding given, support the second reading, and I think it would be a wise course generally for Irish Members to take the same line, in the hope that thereby we may obtain valuable reforms in the system, and that in the constitution of the Board in future we may be able to obtain such a reform as I have indicated.

I rise to perform once again the ungrateful task of criticising the drafting of the Bill. The hon. Gentleman opposite has told us that this Bill does not provide for the preservation of the Irish language. I think, at any rate, judging from this Bill, that the English language has become almost a dead tongue in Parliamentary drafting. The first section of the Bill begins—

"Notwithstanding anything in the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Act, 1878, or the Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890—"

notwithstanding anything in those two Acts—therefore, before I come to this Bill at all I have to know everything in those two Acts. Then I turn to Section 4—

"This Act may be cited as the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Act, 1900, and the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Act, 1878, the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Act, 1882, and this Act shall be construed as one Act, and may be cited collectively as the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Acts, 1878 to 1900."

Therefore I have got four Acts to read together before I can come to a knowledge of what is enacted. That is hard enough, but let me come back to the first clause—

"Notwithstanding anything in the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Act, 1878, or the Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890, portion of the funds—"

What portion? A small portion? A large portion? Some portion? Is there a word omitted? It must be Irish.

If it was Irish it would be intelligible.

Certainly as it is here put in English it is not intelligible. You cannot say "portion." You can say, "a portion," "some portion," or "any portion." It may be adequate, but it does not appear so to me; that is all I say.

"—portion of the funds placed at the disposal of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland (in this Act referred to as 'the Board') may, subject to the proviso in Sub-section (4) of Section 5, and to Section 7 of the said Act of 1878—"

First of all you say, "notwithstanding anything" in that Act, and now it comes in as part of the Act. This seems to me to be another instance of that legislation by reference which has been so often condemned in this House. I do not know how the English or the Irish Attorney General would deal with such a simple matter if they had to refer to the Ten Commandments or the law against murder. I suppose he would say, "Notwithstanding anything in the 20th chapter of Exodus, the word 'wilfully' should be inserted in the 13th verse," and then I suppose he would say, "This Act shall not extend to Ireland." I sometimes ask myself whether the framers know what they have in their minds. Here is another point to which I invite the attention of the Chief Secretary. Sub-section 2 of Clause 1 provides—

"All rules made in pursuance of this section shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament within three weeks after the same have been made, if Parliament be then sitting, or if Parliament be not then sitting, within three weeks of the session then next ensuing."

But which end of the session? Is that right? To make that passage intelligible you should follow the example set in the first part of the phrase and insert—

"Within three weeks after the commencement of the session."

That is the common form.

If that is the common form, then it is not intelligible and it is not plain, and such words ought not to be put into an Act of Parliament. It is another instance of slovenly drafting, and it is neither English nor Irish. I do not think the Education Commissioners will understand this law, and certainly the man who comes down to give technical instruction will not be able to understand it. I protest against this kind of drafting, for the object of a draughtsman should be to render that which is complicated distinct and clear and that which is involved plain, so that we may all understand exactly what laws we have to obey.

reminded the hon. Member for King's Lynn that the object of the drafting of a Bill was that nobody should understand it. Had it not been for the speech of the hon. Member for Waterford he should have been inclined to oppose the measure. He was perfectly sensitive of the number of absurdities that had grown up under the existing system of examinations in Ireland, especially in the teaching of modern languages. In order to obtain passes in French, pupils were instructed to pronounce the French language as it was spelt. As to "cramming," he could not see how pupils could learn anything except by cramming. The system which it was proposed to abolish had to be compared with the system which it was intended to introduce. Could any rule which could be proposed get over the question of personnel? The laws which were passed for Ireland were good enough until they reached the judges. The rules under this Act might be of a splendid and impartial character, but the moment they got away from the practice of this competitive system and entered upon the question of personnel, then came in religious and political controversy, and the schools would consider whether the inspector was a Protestant or a Catholic, whether he was a Jesuit or a member of the Nonconformist conscience. Under the system proposed to be set up they would have at once, unless the inspectors were almost on a level with the angels, a burning-controversy. They had been told that for the first time they were going to have superannuation. He did not know how this superannuation would scale off all this earthly dross. Suppose they appointed as an inspector a most learned, a most pious, and the most perfect Jesuit possible to examine an Orange school— say, in Sandy Row—in the elements of Euclid. The whole of the pupils might find themselves "plucked" by the new examiner. In that case was there an organ in Belfast that would not be ready to contend that this result had ensued because a Jesuit inspector had been sent down? He would take another case. They had at the present time, earning large sums, Jesuit schools in certain parts of the country. Supposing they sent down some hard and fast examiner from the north of Ireland, with very strong theological views, to examine a Catholic school in Cork which had hitherto earned large prizes, was it supposed that they would not have the suggestion made that the inspector was a person of religious bias? He saw the other day, in a paper in the south of Ireland, where it was the custom to have an examination in the Catholic catechism, that several columns were occupied with attacks on the clergyman conducting the examination, whoso fairness was called into question. That was amongst Catholics. Now it was proposed, in regard to a Board composed of four Protestants and three Catholics, to set up a system which was to give satisfaction to both sides. He would ask anybody who had considered the subject to consider the personnel of the examiners, even under the competitive system. Papers were set, and secretly set, and; there had been no imputation whatever of unfairness, and so far as he knew there had been no complaint whatever of the existing competitive system. But it was a strange fact that at the very moment this competitive system was instituted nearly all the examiners were Protestants. Taking the entire body of examiners who had been conducting the competitive system in Ireland for the last twenty years, it was an extraordinary thing that the learned persons set to conduct the examinations nearly all belonged to the general minority of the people in Ireland. His hon. and learned friend had mentioned the names of the members of that Commission, and undoubtedly they were all very eminent men. For his part he protested against judges of the land being appointed members of that body. Why did they not mind their own business? To tell him that a lawyer of the eminence of the Chief of the Bar had not enough to do in his own court, and that he had to fill up his leisure time and amuse himself in setting problems for the benefit of the youth, when he had problems enough to discuss in his own court, was an absurdity, and a gross absurdity. Either the judges had enough to do or they had not. If they had not enough to do, abolish them. If they had enough to do, do not go to the farce of suggesting that men of that laborious occupation could really engage themselves in business of this kind. Take Mr. Justice Mathew. He was no doubt a very distinguished Shakesperian scholar, and a very eminent man in many ways; but was it suggested that he had not enough to do on the bench, or that he ought to be supposed to occupy the Long Vacation in considering those educational problems? Had the Lord Provost of Trinity College not enough to do? The O'Conor Don was a man of leisure, a gentleman and a Catholic, and was a proper appointment from the point of view of a man having time on his hands. Then there was the Rev. Mr. Martin, of the Theological College, Belfast. He knew nothing for or against him, but he thought he should be a gentleman sufficiently employed in the Theological College. Of Mr. David G. Berkley he had never beard, and he did not know whether he came from Belfast or Bantry; and there was the Archbishop of Dublin. The majority were hostile in religion and politics to the majority of the people of Ireland. They were told that in ordinary times Ireland was a hotbed of controversy, but yet a large number of persons of a different persuasion to that of the majority of the people were appointed to these positions. He would be well disposed to have this Bill deferred to another session, and then, perhaps, in a new Parliament the Government might bring up a scheme for the entire revision of the education system. They had stood it now since 1878, and for his part he would be prepared to bear the burden for another twelve months. The final observation he had to make was that he entirely protested against this scheme. The first thing an office-seeker in Ireland wanted was a job; when he got the job he wanted an advance in salary; and when he got the advance he wanted a pension. These office-seekers were all delighted when they got the jobs, and they were perfectly satisfied; then their work became really overpowering, and they claimed an advance of salary, and when they got that they wanted a pension. Who were these gentlemen? Let their names be known. Thorns' Directory was rather vague on the subject, but he would back this: that every man who was to get a pension under the Bill was a Tory and a Protestant. That he was sure of, because there was no fear that the Government would go out of their way to give pensions to Catholics or Nationalists. The Bill, as the hon. Member for King's Lynn complained, was very vague in its drafting; but as he read it, the pension scheme would moan a further diminution of the Irish Church surplus. The Bill stated that "the Board may, if they think fit, order out of the funds at their disposal," which, of course, meant the funds out of the Local Taxation Account—which was to that extent an earmarked Imperial Fund— and the Irish Church surplus. No burden would be placed on John Bull; he was too much engaged in South Africa and China, and of course the losses in Natal must be taken into account. Therefore, for the second time in this session, they had a raid made on the Irish Church surplus for the benefit of a particular class in Ireland. He protested against it. He thought these gentlemen had done very well out of the country. They had had very little to do in making out these examination papers. Look at all the examination papers available. There were the Home Civil Service examination paper, the examination paper for sub-commissioners in Ireland, which he recently brought before the House, and the Indian Civil Service examination papers. The officials would only have to copy from them, and for that they were to be given pensions. There was a great deal to be said for the view of the Gaelic League and other societies of that kind—namely, to block these Hills and then insist on their own views. The Government sooner or later would give in, and, perhaps, if they would give the pensions, the Government would give marks in Irish, or something of that kind. If they promised the pensions the Government might even agree to the teaching of the Irish language, and in that way, in another session, and, perhaps, in a new Parliament, they might get what they wanted. His own view was entirely against the passing of the Bill, and he thought that it was to be regretted that the Government had not determined to bring forward a comprehensive reform of the system now in force.

After an exceedingly long and full inquiry, at which all creeds and classes in Ireland were heard, the members of the intermediate Board, among whom were Archbishop Walsh and the Provost of Trinity College, came to a unanimous conclusion on this matter, and I believe that this scheme was drawn up by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin and the representatives of the Church of Ireland and the Presbyterian Church. I do not suppose that anyone imagines that the Intermediate system in Ireland is, or ever will be, a perfectly ideal one under existing conditions. In working an united system of three creeds we must look not only to questions of efficiency, but quite as much to questions of religion. We must oftentimes duplicate officials, not because they are wanted, but because they belong to different creeds. Examiners must be changed over and over again for the same reason, and under these circumstances you will never get an ideal system. All classes in Ireland are agreed that the system of payment by results, which some years ago was popular, has been carried to an extent which is extremely injurious to the best schools of Ireland, and the real point in this Bill is to substitute payment after inspection to a great extent for payment by results. The three most eminent members of the three different creeds in Ireland are all agreed that this very important change is for the benefit of the poor children for whom this intermediate system is intended, and I earnestly hope that those proposals, having been received with complete harmony in Ireland by members of different creeds, will not be obstructed or opposed by hon. Members, and that this piece of good work for Ireland may be carried into effect during the present session.

I confess I hold what I know to be a somewhat extreme view on this question. I go so far as to differ from the hon. Member for Waterford in what he says as regards the effect that has been produced by the results system in Ireland. I am a bigot on this subject, I admit. I believe, although it is a deplorable thing to have to say, that intermediate education in Ireland is worse to-day than it was fifty years ago. I do not expect any Irishman to agree with me, but I do believe that we have been going backwards. I believe our fathers had better schools in Ireland than we have at the present time. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dublin University, whose authority on these matters is great, and who, whenever he devotes himself to a speech on education or literature, is always listened to by hon. Members on these benches with the respect and interest he deserves, drew in his speech a most melancholy picture of the state of Irish education. He seems to accept it as inevitable that Ireland should for all futurity be condemned to the miserable circumstances which have placed the education of that country in a deplorable position. He said practically that all the evils connected with education in Ireland arose from a conflict of religions and the rival claims of different persuasions. I will tell the House what has been the root, in my judgment, of the unsatisfactory position of the intermediate and every other system of education in Ireland. It is that when the Intermediate Education Act was passed in 1878 no man ever thought for a single moment of considering it from an educational point of view. The Bill was dealt with by the Government and by the House, as all Irish educational questions are dealt with, from the point of view of rival factions in Ire- land, and still more from the point of view of the Parliamentary exigencies of the Government. I have been in this House for twenty years, and I confess I never heard Irish educational questions debated from the point of view of the interests of the people or of educational advancement. Irish education has always been dealt with from the point of view of political exigencies, and that is the reason it is so unsatisfactory. The speech of the right hon. Gentleman shows that he has abandoned all hope of ever reaching the true ideal of education in Ireland, and thinks that we must accept this barbarous system of subordinating the educational interests of the people of Ireland to political exigencies as a permanent system. The original Irish Intermediate Bill was a bad Bill, and the machinery for its administration was worse. I will give the reason for that. We see this extraordinary phenomenon, already alluded to by the hon. Member for Water-ford: that for twenty years the Irish people have been absolutely powerless even to demand a reform in the system of intermediate education, because the House of Commons and the Government of the day—with great ingenuity from the point of view of their own convenience, but with infinite perverseness from an Irish educational point of view—saddled us with an irresponsible Board, and abstained from putting down a single pound on the Estimates which would have enabled us to discuss the system from year to year. The effect of that has been that we have been closured and forbidden to debate the working of the intermediate system of education in Ireland. We have succeeded in effecting very considerable improvements in primary education because, fortunately, we had on the Estimates a large Vote which we were able to discuss, and during which we laid our views before Parliament, and consequently many of our grievances were redressed. But, as regards intermediate education, the Government, warned by their experience in primary education, constructed an iron wall, by which, having passed a very bad Bill and set up a very bad Board, they have completely muzzled Irish Members from discussing the working of the system. In my opinion we never will have decent intermediate education in Ireland until we have a Minister or a Board in control of the system which will boar the same relation to the public opinion of Ireland as the English Board of Education has to public opinion in this country. We hear about the danger to the integrity of the Empire in connection with Home Rule. Was there a danger to the integrity of the Empire in allowing the Irish people to educate their own children according to their own ideas? It was part of the system pursued by this country in regard to primary, intermediate, and university education, to compel the Irish people, by taking hold of their children, to forget that they were Irishmen. In order to stamp out the obnoxious spirit of nationalism, the children were never taught the history of their own country or the history of their language and literature. Although that policy had been laid aside, and men are now ashamed to admit that it had ever been put in force, yet the old principles on which the system of education in Ireland was first started still live. I want to know on what grounds this House denies to Ireland the right to educate her own children according to the views of the people of that country, just as you allow the education system of England to be cast and recast according to popular sentiment in England. Am I to be told that the union of the Empire and the interests and integrity of the Empire demand this sacrifice at our hands? I doubt very much whether any Minister will get up at this time of day and say so. The Chief Secretary of the Colonies cannot say that, because we all remember that in the "unauthorised programme" which was to be the alternative to Home Rule he proposed deliberately that the whole system of education in Ireland should be handed over to an Irish Board. That would be a true system; and we would settle this matter among ourselves. I maintain that all these religious quarrels which are alleged as an excuse for the infamies which have destroyed education in Ireland are the creation of your interference in Ireland, and it is intolerable that you should attempt to justify the ruin of our educational interests by such flimsy pleas. Leave us to ourselves, give us a free hand, and in twenty years we will show a very different picture from now. It is impossible to conceive a question more vitally affecting the future generations of our race than that of education, and yet when a Bill is introduced regarding it, hon. Members who are qualified—none better—to appreciate the real ideals on this matter, get up from these benches and, with gloomy countenance and in a melancholy voice, accept as the unchangeable fate of Ireland that the education of our children must be subordinated to vile politics. It is time for us to put forward a claim on this matter of education which you have so dismally failed to make a success, and that you should give it up to some Irish body which would be responsible to the people of Ireland. My position is that this is largely a question of personality, and we shall never have a satisfactory system of intermediate education in Ireland, nor of primary education, until we have a Board which will be responsible to Irish public opinion. There is only one other point on which I wish to say a few words, and that is as to the teaching of the Irish language and literature. The hon. Member for Waterford said quite correctly that unfortunately in the Report of the Commission, which is a very able Report in certain respects, there is no mention of the teaching of the Irish language. That was not because the Commission did not investigate the subject. They heard a great deal of evidence upon it. The preservation of the old records and the ancient literature of Ireland is a matter of interest to practically all the scholars of Europe. The witnesses who came before the Commission gave most interesting and valuable evidence which struck me very much, although I confess I have been for twenty-five years a member of all these national scientific associations, and was indeed one of the founders of the Association for the Preservation of the Irish Language. But when Professor Atkinson came before the Commission he gave evidence of the most scandalous kind. Although the Chief Secretary smiles, I repeat it was evidence which shocked and disgusted the Gorman and French scholars who take an interest in this matter; and in fact it attracted a great deal of attention throughout Europe. This gentleman, who en-joys the hospitality of Ireland and rejoices in the receipt of a large salary, comes forward and declares that the Irish language and literature are worthless objects of study, that it is impossible to teach the Irish language in the schools of Ireland, because its literature is so disgusting and filthy that he would be ashamed to allow anybody to read it. Now I am sorry to say that, although this subject was so fully investigated, there is no recommendation in the Report in regard to the teaching of the Irish language. If my memory serves me rightly, it was placed long ago among the paying subjects in the schools.

I fail to see how the hon. Member can enter into a general discussion of the teaching of the Irish langauge and literature under this Bill. Of course I understand that regulations are to be made by the Board, and it is possible that the question may arise under these regulations. It is competent for the hon. Member to suggest that from what he has seen in the Report the Board of Education in Ireland should not be entrusted with that power; but to raise the question of the Irish language and literature generally is going too far.

Would it not be in order to move, as an Amendment, that no Bill will be satisfactory to the Irish people which does not provide for the efficient teaching of the Irish language?

I think that would not be in order. This Bill is for the creation of a Board which is to make regulations in connection with intermediate education.

I think if you, Mr. Speaker, will allow me a few moments, on a point of order, I may make some effect on your mind.

I should have said that this is a Bill for entrusting an existing Board with power to make certain regulations.

The Bill is to endow the Board with very great additional powers which will revolutionise the whole system of intermediate education in Ireland. It seems to me to be at the root of the question that the Bill be read a second time, whether the Irish people have sufficient faith in the Board to justify its being entrusted with such powers. The object of granting these powers is to carry into effect the recom- mendations of the Board in its own Report, and it seems to me that we would be clearly in order in discussing the nature of the recommendations, because there is no object in introducing the Bill except to carry out these recommendations.

The hon. Member is entitled to advance arguments to show that the Board ought not to be entrusted with larger powers, but he is going far beyond that. It is irregular to anticipate what the regulations as to teaching Irish may turn out to be, and so to discuss the teaching of the Irish language as if it were the substantial question before the House.

The point which I was trying to address to the House was this. In the past history of the Board they started by putting the Irish language upon the same level as French and German. It is a permissive subject, and that is the policy of the Board. There is no compulsion for any child coming into an Irish school to learn the Irish tongue.

I think the hon. Member is going beyond the scope of the Bill.

Then I fail to see what we are to discuss on this Bill, and I shall be much obliged if the Chief Secretary or somebody else will explain to us. This is a Bill to give large powers to the Board. If we are not entitled to criticise the Board or to discuss the uses which they have made of the powers that they already have, how are we to discuss the question at all? Am I not allowed to go into the history and tell the House the uses they have made of those powers they already have?

I have said that the hon. Member is entitled to show that the Board ought not to be entrusted with large powers, but the hon. Member is not entitled, because there is a particular subject with which the Board will have to deal in the regulations, to treat that subject as a topic for general discussion upon this Bill.

Then I will say that this Board has placed the Irish language upon the plane of French and German— that is to say, on the plane of a foreign tongue; and I think upon that ground we are not justified in trusting the Board in future. I now turn to one point arising out of it which, I think, is strictly in order. This Bill proposes, I think, in Clause 2 a certain method by which the Board is to exercise its power. There is nothing in the Bill laying down the conditions under which intermediate education is to be conducted in Ireland in future, but it is perfectly obvious that the object of the Bill is to place in the hands of the Board the power to alter in the most radical manner the whole system of intermediate education in Ireland. I am in hearty sympathy with the resolution, but I think I am entitled to examine the machinery that is to carry this into effect. The Bill prescribes that it should be effected by rules which shall lie on the Table of the House for forty days. I say that the system of education under these new rules will be illusory and absurd, and early next session —for the rules will not be out this session — we ought to get a pledge that a day will be given to discuss the new rules, when all these matters, which are vital to our people, ought to be fairly and fully discussed. I will put the matter a little further, and I would ask the Government to make this departure: I would ask them to place upon the Estimates some Vote—I care not how small, £50 or £100 a year—by way of a grant-in-aid towards this matter, so that in future we may, from year to year, have a right to discuss the system of intermediate education in Ireland, as we now have a right to discuss primary education. I think that is only reasonable, as it is governed by a Board over which we have no control, and upon which the people of Ireland are only represented by a small minority.

thought that when the hon. Gentleman described himself as a bigot on this Bill he was hardly doing himself justice. In all pro-liability his (Mr. Rentoul's) medical education led him to take a view upon the subject which would not be taken by those who had not given the same study to medical science. While the Commission was sitting to inquire into this matter, a medical man of great eminence wrote to a large number of his professional brethren in Belfast and Dublin upon the question, and received from all a reply which spoke in terms of the terrible evil that was done to intermediate education in Ireland. Those letters were far more important to his mind than any evidence that was given before the Commission, and why they were not published in any newspaper he did not know. It was from the medical point of view that this Bill ought to be considered, and therefore he could not agree with the first of the three propositions laid down by the hon. Member for Waterford. The hon. Member said that the system of intermediate education that had been in vogue since 1879 had done marked good. No doubt the hon. Gentleman spoke from his own experience; but let hon. Gentlemen compare their experience with his. The hon. Gentleman's first remark was that boys work with greater assiduity; that he emphatically and entirely denied. In the schools before 1879—before this system of intermediate education was started—the assiduity of the boys was just as great as at the present time. He had been a pupil at four Irish schools, and had once had opportunities of being in many in connection with prize distributions, and he had taken a great interest in this subject. Bribery with regard to education—and he regarded these prizes and scholarships as bribery—had been rampant in Ireland since 1879. It was simple bribery and prostituting education, and dragging it down from the high level on which it ought to stand. The cultivation of the intellect ought to stand next in importance to the cultivation of the soul, though it required a greater metaphysician than himself to say where the one ended and the other began, and he almost despaired when bribery and fraud were so rampant. They might almost as well offer bribes to people to attend to their religious duties. The hon. Member then said that the standard of education had been raised, and there, again, his experience did not coincide with that of the hon. Gentleman. As a test he would point out that the intermediate schools, both before and since 1879, had been preparing students for the university colleges, but, so far as he could hear, the standard of examination necessary to obtain a scholarship in the three Queen's colleges had not improved. The standard of education had not been improved at all. If the standard had been raised in the intermediate schools, clearly the standard in the university colleges must have risen too. Some hon. Gentlemen only smiled, and that was because they did not approve of the Queen's colleges, but that had nothing to do with the question. The point was that so long as students came into the colleges from these schools the colleges were the test of the work done in the schools. He found on looking over the list that Queen's College, Galway, had the honour of having more Members in that House than any other university college in the United Kingdom except Christ Church, Oxford, and that being so the scholarships of that college would certainly be the test in the matter. Then the hon. and learned Gentleman said that education by this intermediate system was being extended to the poor. Again he would ask the hon. and learned Gentleman, before he repeated that statement, to investigate and find out whether there were more students now going on to university education than before 1879—whether, in fact, the number had increased, and whether intermediate education had done anything in that direction. The hon. and learned Member had said that the system had many grave defects. There he agreed with him at once. He listened with great attention and took great pains to hear what the many defects wore, in order to treasure them as the result of the hon. and learned Member's experience of the subject. As far as he could gather, the hon. and learned Member stopped with one of the grave defects, and that was with reference to the seven gentlemen who formed the Board. The grave defect there, in the hon. and learned Gentleman's mind, seemed to be that four members were Protestants and three were Catholics.

That is a most unfair statement. I only alluded to the constitution of the Board in passing. The real defect in the constitution of the Board to which I drew attention was that it was irresponsible and had net associated with it, as have other similar Boards elsewhere, anything in the nature of a consultative council.

said he should be extremely sorry to say anything unfair to the hon. and learned Member, but that was how the matter struck him. He did not gather any other objection. He now came to the recommendations of the Commission, and he might refer just in a sentence in passing to the question of teaching the Irish language. He thought that instead of letting children waste their time in learning Irish it would be better to let them learn French and Gorman, or something that would do them some good. As for the statement that the teaching of Irish was desirable on account of its necessity in the investigation of old documents, surely it was rather trifling with a serious debate to put such an argument forward. There were not three of the Irish Members in that House who, in addressing their constituents, could speak fifteen words of Irish. [Several HON. MEMBERS: It is not true.] Hon. Members said the statement was not true. He always liked things to be brought at once to the test. His test was this. Let hon. Members representing Irish constituencies who did speak the Irish language write letters to the newspapers in the Irish language contradicting the statement. A statement of that sort made across the floor of the House did not mean much, and recoiled upon the gentlemen who made it. He recalled to the recollection of hon. Members the statement made only a few weeks ago by the Lord Chief Justice as to the inutility of trying to learn the Irish language. As regarded the Commission, one recommendation was certainly of extreme value. He referred to the recommendation with regard to having a modern school course and a grammar school course. The hon. Member for North Louth had said he did not see very much objection to cramming. He could not help thinking that the hon. Member must attach a different meaning to the word from that which was usual. The word education meant the drawing out of the mental powers, but cramming was the very opposite. What did they mean by cramming as understood technically in schools? They meant that educational pills were prepared, and that they were; swallowed. A portion of history was taken, and a few questions were drawn up and tabulated with the answers. The pupils, without understanding the bearing; of the matter at all, had to commit these questions and answers to memory. They knew that was the way preparation was, done by cramming. The same thing applied to languages. In connection with Latin or Greek, for example, certain catch words, very odd forms of expression, were picked out. They were of very little value to the scholar, but they were generally nicked out as catches, and put down in the examination paper. Reference was made in the debate by the hon. and learned Member to the system of. teaching and examining in modern languages. Anything more futile than that system of teaching could not be imagined!. It was a fact that the pupils were not allowed to pronounce the word at all, lest the attempt to pronounce the word should have an evil effect on their spelling. That was cramming. He advised the hon. and learned Member to look into the meaning of the word cramming. It was a word which was perfectly well-known in the educational world. When a tutor was being employed at present to prepare a pupil privately for the intermediate course he had known the question asked, "Is he a good crammer?" They all knew that cramming was a means of stunting and dwarfing the intellect. If any one wanted to encourage cramming there was no. better means by which it could be done than by the intermediate system as it had existed hitherto. Many Irishmen considered that it would have been better if not a single farthing had been spent on intermediate education since 1879, and. that a vast number of shattered constitutions and early graves were the result of the system. Now a change was to be made, but it was impossible to say whether it would be one atom better. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dublin University said the rules would be made by very able men. But they did not know what the rules would be. It was said that a Report would, be laid on the Table, and that they would have time to consider and discuss the rules. They might be discussed after twelve o'clock, and, of course, if the discussion took place then there was no possibility of teaching the constituencies on one of the most important Bills which had been before this Parliament. To say that the members of the Board were well meaning, conscientious men who would do their best and so forth, did not meet the case. No doubt the Government of 1879 were most anxious to leave on the Statute-book an Act that they themselves would feel credit in afterwards; but it seemed to him that the Act was worse than useless. There was nothing more deplorable in education than to be perpetually changing the system. They must give a plant time to grow before they pulled it up by the roots. He was not in favour of the proposal presented by the Bill; he would rather see the question postponed, or the Commissioners allowed to exercise whatever powers they now possessed at their discretion without the Bill, than that the whole matter should be shelved, as it would be if this Bill was passed, for a very considerable time. The hon. Member for East Mayo had, as usual, made use of the Bill to make some reference to Home Rule. It was, however, rather unfortunate that he did not look more carefully at the result of his argument. He said:—"Why is not this matter left to the Irish and the different denominations? Leave the Irish to manage their own affairs." But that was exactly what was done by the Intermediate Board. [" No."] The Board was composed of seven gentlemen, every one of whom was Irish.

Nominated by Dublin Castle.

What does that matter? They were seven men of great distinction, and what did it matter if they were nominated by Dublin Castle, so long as the right men were nominated? If there had been a Home Rule Parliament in Dublin they would in all probability have nominated these very men. There was not one of them who could possibly have been objectionable to such a Parliament.

explained that his point was, that whoever was nominated or elected should be responsible to a body representing the people.

This Intermediate Education Board is responsible to this House. ["No."] Then what does this Bill mean?

It is not responsible. Ask the Chief Secretary.