I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the grave situation in China, he will give the House full details of the considerable reinforcements of men and ships which he stated were on their way to China, in addition to the increases previously announced; and whether Her Majesty's Government have decided to further augment our naval and military forces in the Far East for the protection of the lives and property of British subjects.

The, reinforcements in ships which have been sent out to China since the present outbreak consist of: "Goliath," battleship; "Argonaut," "Ms," "Dido," "Marathon," "Wallaroo," "Arethusa," and "Mohawk," cruisers; "Lizard," "Bramble," and "Britomart," gunboats; besides 860 seamen and marines by transport. The despatch of reinforcements will naturally depend upon the course of events. Ten thousand men have been despatched from India, and the troops withdrawn from Hong Kong are being made up. Further troops have been placed under orders in India, and can be immediately despatched if necessity arises. Troops will be available in this country to replace any troops withdrawn.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government have taken any steps to prevent the exportation of arms or munitions of war to China by British firms; and, if not, whether immediate steps will be taken.

As the hon. Member knows, it is impossible in the present state of the law to forbid the importation of munitions of war into China from this country; but the matter seems to the Government to be extremely pressing, and to-day a Bill will be introduced in the House of Lords conferring the necessary powers.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that Mr. Warren, the Acting British Consul General at Shanghai, is now the senior representative of British interests in China, and possesses such knowledge of Chinese affairs as will enable him to deal with the Viceroys in the present crisis, the Government are prepared to give him temporary rank as Chargé d'Affaires.

Full powers to take all necessary action have been given to Consul General Warren, but it is not considered desirable in the present state of affairs to make the change suggested by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government are aware that a strong opinion has been expressed at Shanghai that a powerful body of British troops together with transports should be held in readiness at Hong Kong for immediate despatch to the Yang-tsze Valley in case of necessity; and can he state what are the number of troops now at Hong Kong available for such service, and whether they are provided with sufficient transports.

The Government are aware that strong views are held at Shanghai and other Yang-tsze ports as to the desirability of sending ships and troops for the protection of Europeans, but there is not unanimity of opinion as to the effect of such action. Troops are now rapidly arriving from India. The officers commanding the troops at Hong Kong and Wei-hai-wei have been directed to place themselves in direct communication with the Consul General at Shanghai with a view of meeting any emergency.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the last part of my question, as to the number of troops available and the supply of transports.

Will the Government consider the alternative of withdrawing all British subjects in this region to Hong Kong?

I wish to ask the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether the statement is true, which has appeared in one paper, that sixty missionaries have been massacred in Shan-si.

I have seen the statement which appeared in one paper, but Her Majesty's Government have no confirmation of it, and we are in hopes that it may not be correct.

I wish to ask whether the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs can state the number and class of ships on the Yang-tsze River?

Sixteen of Her Majesty's ships are at present employed on the Yang-tsze and its vicinity, and are being moved from day to day to meet the constantly changing conditions. The senior naval officer is at Woosung, and is in close communication with the Consul General at Shanghai. It is not desirable that the exact positions of Her Majesty's ships on the China Station should be specified during the present critical condition of affairs.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will state what number of the 22,000 troops at present drawn from the India establishment for foreign service are British troops and what will be the number of British troops in India subject to these deductions.

The number of British troops at present withdrawn from the Indian establishment for foreign service is about 8,600. The actual number of British troops in India, allowing for these deductions, is about 61,000.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary for War a question of which I have given him private notice—namely, whether it is a fact, as stated by the hon. Member for Westminster in the daily press, that civil surgeons employed in military hospitals in South Africa have been required by the Army Medical Department to sign a contract not to divulge in any way what their impressions may be on hospital matters.

Civil surgeons have to sign a contract—not being enrolled or amenable to discipline under the Army Act—accepting the terms offered and the obligation of discipline therein set out. I have in my hand a copy of the contract. The only paragraphs that bear upon discipline are as follows—

"During the said period I will devote my whole time and professional skill to my service hereunder, and will obey all orders given to me by commissioned military or naval officers, or by the permanent medical officers of either of those services."

And the next paragraph runs—

"In case I shall complete my service hereunder to your satisfaction in all respects, I shall receive at the end of the said period a gratuity of two months full pay at the rate hereinbefore specified; but in case I shall in any manner misconduct myself, or shall be (otherwise than through illness or unavoidable accident) unfit in any respect for service hereunder, of which misconduct or unfitness you shall be sole judge, you shall be at liberty from and immediately after such misconduct or unfitness to discharge me from further service hereunder, and thereupon all pay and allowances hereunder shall cease, and I shall not be entitled to any free passage home or gratuity."

That is the only contract civil surgeons have to sign, and for my part I cannot discover any foundation for the statement in question.

Arising out of the answer of the hon. Member, I desire to ask him a question which contains a correction of detail, but adds I think very largely to the force and significance of the statement to which the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire refers. It is this—whether it is not the case that after some letters had been published from doctors in South African hospitals they had to sign a declaration to the effect that they were not to communicate their impressions of hospital matters to the public, or that they were to take the consequences?

I have no knowledge to any such effect. The contract I have read is the only contract we have, and I am unaware of any other contract whatever.

On that point it may be desirable to communicate by telegraph with South Africa as to whether this declaration exists or was enforced.

There is no objection whatever.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state why the explanation of Colonel Long, R.A., with reference to the circumstances under which the guns were lost at the battle of the Tugela, has been withheld from the public, having regard to the fact that Sir Redvers Buller in his despatch or communication with reference to the capture of these guns, while throwing on 'Colonel Long the responsibility of the mishap, stated that he was too ill at the time to give any explanation; and whether, in justice to Colonel Long, who has been censured without having been heard in his defence, Colonel Long's statement, which has been for a considerable time in the possession of the authorities, will be immediately published.

I understand that it is not the practice to publish communications of the kind to which the hon. Member refers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Sir Redvers Buller said that Colonel Long had no opportunity to give his own account of the transaction? Now that the account has been given, why not publish it in justice to Colonel Long?

Because it is not usual to publish documents of that kind. I do not know why the rule should be departed from in this case.

I beg-to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can say whether any steps wore taken with a view to substantiate the statements contained in letters addressed to the Times of Natal and the Natal Mercury by private individuals previous to their insertion in the Blue-book on South African affairs just issued; and whether it is customary to publish uncorroborated newspaper correspondence in Blue-books.

There is nothing unusual in the publication of newspaper correspondence. The first letter is corroborated by Sir R. Buller's telegram published at page 154; the second by a declaration by Mr. Kennard, made before the Resident Commissioner of Basutoland.

Do not the statements appearing in South African papers require confirmation, in view of the fact that South Africa has earned for itself the title of the "land of lies"?

I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for War whether he has received any report from Lord; Roberts since the release of the prisoners of war at Pretoria as to the treatment accorded to them during their confinement; if he has, what is the purport of it, and when the despatches on the subject will be laid upon, the Table of the House.

No such report, has been received from, Lord Roberts.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of troops sent to South Africa since 5th June.

12,203 officers and men.

How many were Regulars?

All, I think; but I cannot pledge myself to that.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether a proclamation has been issued at Pretoria under which such women as are believed to be the wives of men who are fighting against us are to be driven into the enemy's lines; whether among these women are any who have been rendered destitute through the burning of their farms and crops; and whether the proclamation will be enforced against children as well as, women.

No intimation to this effect has been received at the War Office.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether paragraph 670, Royal Warrant for Pay and Promotion, which provides that Army Reserve officers shall during their employment on Army service be eligible for promotion, applies to Army medical officers; and if this paragraph does not apply to these officers, what are,the grounds of their exclusion from its benefits.

The article in question applies to Army medical officers.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the inquest held on the 15th instant upon the body of Gunner John Addis, of the South Cork Artillery Militia, who was killed on Monday by the bursting of the breech of a 40-pounder gun at Camden Fort, county Cork; whether the gun was one of four that were injured before, whether it was an out-of date pattern and had been condemned, and whether he can state what precautions are taken to test guns before artillery practice is entered upon; and whether, in view of the circumstances of the case, the War Office will duly compensate the relatives of the deceased gunner, and also the other gunners who were wounded, one of them dangerously, upon that occasion.

The matter referred to by the hon. Member will be inquired into.

How soon shall we know the result?

We have had one report, but it is considered necessary to have an expert opinion on the gun. I anticipate receiving that report at no distant date.

I will put another question down.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the War Office, by a letter written early this month, informed the officer commanding the 2nd Kent Volunteer Artillery that the allowances paid for the Easter camp would be deducted at the settlement of the special camp accounts; and whether, in view of the charges which would thereby be thrown upon the corps should they attend the special camp, he could see his way to forego the deduction of the Easter camp charge, amounting to over £400, and so enable this corps, which is up to its full strength, to attend the special camp.

As the corps was specially required in connection with a scheme of mobilisation, the Secretary of State for War has sanctioned the issue of allowances for the Easter camp.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the Government is prepared to facilitate the formation and success of rifle clubs by allowing fifty rounds of ammunition per man free, by granting the free use of Government ranges when not required by the Army and Reserve forces, by supplying condemned Lee-Enfield rifles for Morris tube practice, and by issuing Lee-Enfield service rifles in the proportion of one to every ten members without charge to the club.

The Government will allow to authorised rifle clubs ammunition at cost price up to 100 rounds per member, and Lee-Enfield rifles at cost price in the proportion of one for every ten members. The question of Morris tube rifles has not been raised by the National Rifle Association, through which the War Office is dealing with these clubs. The question of the terms on which the use of Government ranges can be given is under consideration.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he is aware of the fact that the only application made to visit the Camp, South Denes, Yarmouth, was that made by the Sisters of Nazareth, highly commended in South Africa; and what explanation; has been given by Colonel Commanding Brownrigg for their being turned away from the camp now containing 1,000 Roman Catholic Volunteers.

I am prepared to inquire into this matter.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware there are 1,000 Catholic troops in this camp, and that no objection was offered by the men to the visits of these sisters?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, seeing that a communication was received by the War Office on or about the 18th May, inquiring whether sanction would be given for the formation of a Volunteer Corps of Engineers in South East Lancashire, including Manchester, Salford, and neighbouring towns, and that the assurance was given that over 1,000 men connected with the engineering and allied trades had promised to join and to conform with the Volunteer Regulations Act, whether any definite reply has been given; and, if not, can he state whether the necessary sanction and consent of the War Office will be granted for the formation of the proposed corps if all the necessary conditions and requirements are properly undertaken.

The question is under the consideration of the general officer commanding North Western District, with whom the persons proposing to raise the corps have been requested to correspond.

On behalf of the noble Lord the Member for Roxburgh (Earl of DALKEITH), I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the importance of the First Sea Lord living at the Admiralty in order to enable him to deal with urgent matters of pressing necessity that arise after office hours, Her Majesty's Government have considered the necessity for providing a residence for him in the Admiralty buildings, or adjacent to them; and, if not, will they undertake to consider it.

The Government have under consideration a plan for meeting the demand for a residence for the Senior Naval Lord in the vicinity of the Admiralty, and it is hoped that it may be brought to a successful conclusion.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the Admiralty, if he will state why coal was taken under emergency contracts for the Naval manœuvres in 1888, and why none has been taken since; whether the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, as sole judges of the circumstances constituting anticipated or actual war under which contractors shall be called upon to supply on emergency contracts, have decided that the military operations in South Africa and in China are not circumstances such as would constitute actual or anticipated war; and if it be the intention of the Admiralty not to carry out their emergency contracts when the state of the coal market enables them to do better without them, will he in future see that this is notified to the contractors before the contracts are entered into.

Coals for the manæuvres were included in the emergency contracts until 1899. Since then they have been brought under separate contracts, that being, in the opinion of the Admiralty, the preferable course. It has not been considered necessary to come to any such decision as that indicated in the hon. Member's question, coal for China and South Africa being provided for in the ordinary way. With regard to the last paragraph, the question of what notification shall be given to contractors is being considered.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, if it be impossible to assist the British Central African Protectorate with a direct grant, Her Majesty's Government will be prepared to guarantee a loan for the construction of a railway from Chiromo to Lake Nyassa.

Her Majesty's Government are not prepared at present to undertake such a railway, or to guarantee a loan for its construction.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state when the Papers with referencs to the disturbances in connection with the British Central Africa Rifles, when quartered in Mauritius, will be laid before the House.

It is not proposed to lay any Papers on this subject before Parliament.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have had letters from Lord Selborne and the Under Secretary of State for War promising that these Papers should be laid on the Table?

No, Sir; I was not aware of that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman verify my statement? I do not expect him to believe it on my word.

Of course I entirely accept the statement of the hon. Member, and I will make inquiries into the subject. But the matter has been further considered; and I am not prepared to say now that I will produce Papers on the subject, f do not think it would be in the public interest that I should do so.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it has been decided to swear the Governor General in at Sydney, and to inaugurate the Australian Commonwealth in that city; whether Sydney will also be the official residence of the Governor General until the establishment of the permanent Federal capital; and whether the inconveniences likely to arise from the Governor General residing in Sydney, while the Federal Parliament has to meet in Melbourne, have been taken into consideration.

The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. The Government of New South Wales has been informed that if the other colonies agree, Her Majesty's Government will not object to the Governor General residing at Sydney while the Federal Parliament is not sitting, but that the matter must be subject to the decision of the Federal Administration. While the Federal Parliament is sitting at Melbourne the Governor General will, of course, reside there.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he can state the total number of deaths from cholera in the famine districts, including the native States, since the beginning of the famine.

I have not yet received full statistics of cholera deaths in British districts and native States since the beginning of the famine. When cholera became severely epidemic, I asked for weekly telegrams regarding the ravages; and in my answer yesterday I quoted the totals of the figures given in those telegrams which are published with the famine telegrams in the newspapers.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the services of more than one medical man have been available at most of the largo famine camps, containing from 20,000 to 30,000 people, at any time during the famine or since the outbreak of cholera.

I have not received details as to the individual distribution of medical officers and medical subordinates at the different relief camps and relief houses. The Famine Codes contain full instructions for strengthening the medical staff in famine districts, for provision of hospital accommodation on relief works, for posting a medical officer or a subordinate qualified for independent charge to each hospital, for the duties of such medical officers. The instructions as to engaging additional medical officers and subordinates from outside the regular service, when need arises, are full and clear.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the correspondence relating to the excess charges on passengers' luggage.

The correspondence is at present by no means complete. When it is I will consider the propriety of laying it on the Table.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, having regard to the Report and recommendations last year of the Departmental Committee appointed in 1898 to inquire into the manufacture and use of water gas, and also to the fact that such gas, made from coke and oil instead of coal, is being increasingly and profitably produced by gas companies, whilst local authorities owning their own gas works are now debarred from laying out such plant, owing to the refusal of the Local Government Board to sanction loans for this purpose until the regulations recommended for the use of carburetted water gas are laid down, the Board of Trade will take steps to frame such rules and regulations at an early date.

The Board of Trade cannot give effect to the recommendations of the Departmental Committee by rules and regulations. Legislation would be necessary, and on this point I can only say, as I did in reply to a question put by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Stepney, on the 25th May, that in any general legislation my right hon. friends, the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the President of the Local Government Board, would probably have a larger interest than the Board of Trade, and that I cannot make any promise on the subject.

was understood to ask: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in a great number of towns water gas is being supplied in excess of the regulation amount?

No, Sir; but if the hon. Gentleman can give me any information I shall be happy to consider it.

May I ask whether it is not a fact that analysis showed that in Dublin 20 per cent. of water gas was used contrary to the recommendations of the Home Office Committee?

I shall inquire into that.

I bog to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the quantities of coal shipped from this country and from the United States respectively during the eleven months ending 31st May last, to France, to Germany, and to other European countries.

The exports of coal, coke, etc., from the United Kingdom to the countries named in the eleven months ending 31st May, 1900, were as follows: —France, 6,969,313 tons; Germany, 4,973,634 tons; other parts of Europe, approximately 19,000,000 tons. The amounts of coal exported from the United States to these countries in the same period were:— France, 26,336 tons; Germany, 2,126 tons; other parts of Europe, 136,645 tons.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary for Home Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the publication in The Times to-day of the principal recommendations contained in the Report of the Committee on Fire Brigades before the Report has been laid on the Table of the House and circulated, and if he will, as chairman, inform the House how this confidential document has been obtained by The Times.

I have seen the publication to which my hon. friend refers, and am sorry I can give him no information whatever as to how or by whom that information was given. The last act of the Committee before separating was to pledge themselves that they would give no information whatever on the subject until the Report was printed and in the hands of Members.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that an assistant inspector of postmen at York who, although he has passed sixty years of age, has had his period of service extended another five years, is allowed to keep a shop with a beer off-licence; and whether this is in accordance with the rules of the Department.

When the assistant inspector of postmen referred to attained the age of sixty in April, 1899, he was reported to be efficient in the discharge of his duties, and it was decided that he might remain for the present—not for any specified number of years. As he had been in possession of the off-licence for upwards of twenty years without the knowledge of the Department, it was not, in view of his early retirement, which will very shortly take place, considered necessary to require him to relinquish it.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that a clerk in the Liverpool Postal Department has been promoted to be a superintendent after twenty-five years service, and that sixty-nine telegraphists in the Liverpool Office are awaiting promotion to the clerks class, some of them having over thirty years service, many of them being established telegraphists at the time the recently promoted officer was a corporal of messengers; and whether, in view of the Fawcett Scheme and the Tweedmouth Committee deciding that the Postal and Telegraphic branches of the Post Office should be placed on an equality, the Postmaster General will take steps to carry this into effect.

This post of assistant superintendent on the postal side of the office was filled by the promotion of a clerk employed on postal duties who was reported to be the best qualified for the position. None of the sixty-nine telegraphists to whom the hon. Member refers would have been capable of performing the duties of the clerkship-vacated by the promoted officer. The Postmaster General takes every opportunity to equalise as far as possible the prospects on the postal and telegraphic sides; but cases must always occur in which promotion is more rapid on one side than on the other.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that a number of telegraphists in the cable room, Central Telegraph Office, have boon punished for exceeding, the thirty minutes allowed for meal relief by one or two minutes; and that the plea of delay in the refreshment branch has been held unsatisfactory in the case of an officer who was supplied with bad meat, and needed the food changed; and whether, seeing that the dinner period is the only relief time permitted in; duties which are frequently of ton and twelve hours duration, the Postmaster General will authorise a relaxation of the rule.

No telegraphist in the cable room of the Central Telegraph Office has been punished for exceeding his dinner time—thirty minutes—under the circumstances stated in the question. When the delay has been three minutes and upwards he has been admonished; and frequent repetitions of those delays have been punished by the infliction of extra duty. But when they are proved to have arisen from causes over which the telegraphist had no control the excess time is excused. In the absence of particulars of the case to which the hon. Member refers, the Postmaster General is unable to give any information. In his opinion no relaxation of the rule, as I have stated it, is called for.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether a female telegraphist in the Harwich post office has been informed that she must be transferred from that office, and proceed at her own expense to the Enfield office; whether she is able to adequately perform all the duties of the Harwich office that are allocated to the female staff; and whether the Postmaster General will investigate the case with a view to provide against the telegraphist being compelled to attend the Enfield post office, and in the event of a transfer, that the Department will bear the cost of the removal.

The late postmaster of Harwich had five of his relatives employed under him at the Harwich office, it is not desirable in the interest of efficient control that the staff of an office should consist to any large extent of persons who are related to one another, and it has accordingly been decided to make certain transfers of staff from Harwich to other offices. One of these transfers is that to which the hon. Member refers, and it is not proposed to alter the decision arrived at. The telegraphist concerned was wrongly informed by the present Postmaster that she would have to bear her own removal expenses. They will be defrayed up to a reasonable amount by the Department.

Does not this telegraphist suffer some depreciation of salary by the change?

I understand not.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the night mails for North Devon are sent on from Exeter by luggage train, and that owing to the delay so caused and to the refusal of the Post Office to adopt the method of railway sub-offices more generally, letters are not delivered in the outlying country districts until late in the morning, and whether he will take steps to expedite the train service and to adopt in more cases railway sub-offices.

The question of improving the night mail service to country districts in North Devon is under consideration. The cost of substituting a faster train from Exeter for that now used would be considerable, and the Postmaster General fears that such an alteration would be quite impracticable. It may be possible, however, to effect some acceleration of the local services, and the Postmaster General has caused a communication to be addressed to the local railway company enquiring what would be the cost of improving the Lynton service. If any means are found practicable for improving the postal services to Lynton and Hartland they will be readily adopted.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education if he can state approximately the amount which England received from the Imperial Exchequer during the financial year last ended in respect of the operation of the Voluntary Schools Act, 1897, and the Elementary Education Act, 1897.

The amount for England and Wales was, under the first-named Act, £621,516 4s. 11d.; and under the second, £210,890 11s. 11d.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he can state approximately the amount which Scotland received from the Imperial Exchequer during the financial year last ended in respect of the operation of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1897.

The grants paid in respect of the operation of he Education (Scotland) Act, 1897, are:(1) the additional grant to school boards under Section 67 of the Act of 1872, as amended by Section 1 of the Act of 1897. The total paid under this head in the financial year last ended was £44,137 19s. 9d., of which it is estimated that £24,000 was paid in respect of the operation of the Act of 1897, the remainder having been claimable under the Act of 1872. And (2) the aid grant to Voluntary schools, amounting to £12,184 0s. 6d.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate what is the amount of the fees paid by class students in each of the Universities of Scotland; and whether Her Majesty's Government are prepared to assent to the printing of a Return on the subject giving the details in accordance with the notice on the Order Paper for to-day.

I shall be happy to give the hon. and learned Member the replies which have now been received from the Universities, and if, after perusal of those documents, he will confer with the Secretary for Scotland as to the exact form in which he wishes to move for it, the Return will be granted.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if his attention has been called to the continued irregularity of the delivery of newspapers in the South Western District of Scotland, if he will inquire into the cause, and endeavour without further delay to put matters on a better footing.

The Postmaster General is not aware of the continued irregularity in the delivery of newspapers in the South Western District of Scotland to which the hon. Member refers, but if particulars can be given of any delays which have occurred immediate inquiry on the subject shall be made.

There are so many cases of delay in the delivery of newspapers for twenty-four hours. Is it not for the Post Office to find out these things for itself?

I cannot answer that, as I do not belong to the Post Office, I will, however, consider the point.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will have arrangements made in the taking of the census in March, 1901, to obtain a Return of the number of persons in Ireland (being of three years of age or upwards) who speak English only or Irish only, or both Irish and English, in like manner as is required in the Census Bill with regard to the speaking of the Welsh language in Wales and the county of Monmouth.

If the hon. Member will refer to the Returns of the last census in Ireland he will observe that they contained statistics of all persons who spoke Irish only, or Irish and English. Similar statistics will be collected and published in connection with the approaching census, in Ireland.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Governors of the Cavan and Monaghan Lunatic Asylum made a demand last week on the County Council of Monaghan for £6,500 to carry out a sewerage scheme; and that this sum is being expended without letting or offering the work by contract; whether he can state who is superintending the carrying out of this work on the asylum premises; whether he is aware that sewerage schemes costing large sums of the ratepayers' money carried out during recent years have proved a failure in the asylum; and whether he will see that the money of the ratepayers is not allowed to be lost now, and whether a contract for this work could still be taken.

As stated by me yesterday, the Local Government Board, on the application of the Asylum Committee, have sanctioned the issue of a loan to the amount mentioned for sewerage works at the asylum, the repayment of the loan to be spread over a period of thirty years. I am informed that the works are being carried out by the employment of tradesmen and labourers under the superintendence of Mr. Peddie, a sanitary engineer of high repute, assisted by a civil engineer as clerk of works. The decision as to the manner in which such works are to be executed is vested solely in the Asylum Committee, and there is no obligation imposed upon them to let or offer the execution of such works by contract. No other sewerage scheme has been carried out at this asylum since it was built thirty-one years ago. It would be the duty of the Local Government auditor to inquire into any expenditure of an illegal or unnecessary character in connection with the asylum.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Belfast Board of Guardians recently advertised for a master for the workhouse, that a committee of the guardians selected a number of suitable men for the position out of many applicants, and that when the day of election came the question was postponed, which in the opinion of the clerk was illegal; whether he can state the name of the gentleman that the committee thought most suitable for the mastership, and if the guardians will bear the expenses of the candidates who travelled long distances in expectation of the election taking place according to advertisement; and whether he can say what coarse he intends to adopt in reference to the action of the guardians in not carrying out the election of master of the workhouse on the date fixed.

The committee appointed by the guardians reported that only eight candidates for the position of master of the workhouse were qualified under the terms of the advertisement, and they recommended the guardians to issue fresh advertisements for candidates. This the guardians decided to do. The Local Government Board have no information as to the statement of opinion attributed to the clerk, or as to the matters referred to in the second paragraph. The Board do not propose to take any action respecting the postponement of the appointment, as the guardians appear to have acted within their powers.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the arrears of National School Grant for 1892, 1893, 1894, and 1895 will be paid only to living teachers, or will the arrears due be paid to the next-of-kin in cases in which the teacher to whom the arrears were due is dead, and whether retired teachers will be paid arrears due.

If the money be voted by Parliament, an equivalent for the so-called arrears of school grant will, under the sanction of the Treasury, be apportioned among all teachers who were entitled to participate in the residual grant of the four years in question. In the case of those teachers since dead, their representatives will receive the amount payable. The grant will be subject to certain deductions on account of the pension fund.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the National school teacher at Sneem, county Kerry, has offered at a loss to himself the necessary site for a teacher's residence, and that the only obstacle to the erection of the teacher's residence is that the Local Government Board and the local landlord cannot agree as to the suitability of the site; and whether the Government will use its influence to compel, if necessary, the Local Government Board and the local landlord to come to such an arrangement as will allow the erection of this residence to be proceeded with.

My right hon. friend the Attorney General for Ireland replied very fully to a question addressed to him on this subject on the 9th February last.^* To that reply I have nothing to add except to say that no correspondence has taken place with the Local Government Board on the subject.

^* See The Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxxviii., page 1056.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in awarding the future income of first and second class National teachers who, owing to epidemics and severity of the weather, did not receive their full class salary for the last three years and whose results fees and residual grant were lessened in consequence, the Commissioners of National Education make due allowances for those diminutions of salary.

The hon. Member on referring to Clause 20 of the New Rules will observe that cases in which the Commissioners may deem it inequitable to fix the future incomes of the teachers on the basis of their average incomes for the past three years will be specially considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he explain why the future scale of salaries for National teachers is omitted in the extract from the forthcoming rules of the Commissioners presented to Parliament last week; and whether he can state the future scale of salaries; whether he has observed that, by Rules 11, 12, and 13 of this extract, all assistant teachers and highly classed teachers at present in charge of small schools are degraded from the rank they previously won by good service and success at examinations and whether he will advise the Commissioners of National Education to rule that every teacher at present in the service shall continue to retain his classification, and to be described officially as of his present rank until promoted or depressed by the rules which were in force when he won that class; whether he is aware that, by the operation of the same rules, teachers in small schools are made ineligible for promotion, and thereby prevented from qualifying for the pension of a higher class to which they were formerly entitled to aspire; and if he can take any steps to remedy this alleged grievance.

The future scale of salaries is omitted in the extract from the new code of the Commission as it has not yet been fixed by the Commissioners and submitted to the Irish Government and the Treasury. It is impossible to state the future scale of salaries except approximately. It is not true that by Rules 11, 12, and 13 all assistant teachers, and highly-classed teachers at present in charge of small schools, are degraded from the rank they previously won by success at examinations. Every teacher at present in the service will be described officially according to his position in the old class and the new grade in the Annual Register of Teachers. It is impossible to reply to the third paragraph of the question at present, as the necessary modifications of the pension rules have not yet been made.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that the Annual Report of the Commissioners of Intermediate Education, Ireland, does not contain the names of the superintendents of examinations, the Commissioners will consider the advisability of giving the names and professions of these gentlemen in future Reports.

The suggestion in this question will be brought before the Commissioners of Intermediate Education at their next meeting.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland why the results of the examinations for monitors, held in April last, have not yet been communicated to the candidates, and when will they be informed of the results; and what is the cause of the delay, seeing that over three months have now elapsed.

The results of the examinations in question will be made known without delay,

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the cases of two prisoners named Muldowney and Finigan, of Croughwell, who were convicted in Sligo and have been about seventeen years confined; and whether he will review their cases with a view to recommending His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to grant their discharge.

The prisoners named in the question were convicted of murder at the Sligo Assizes in August, 1884, and sentenced to death. The sentence was subsequently commuted to one of penal servitude for life. Their cases were under the consideration of the Lord Lieutenant in August of last year, when it was decided that the law must take its course. The case of convict Finigan was again under consideration in November, with a like result. As respects the second paragraph, it is not my province to act as suggested. Any application or memorial praying for a mitigation of sentence should be addressed to the Lord Lieutenant, in whom alone is vested the exercise of the prerogative of mercy.

When will these cases come up again in the ordinary course for reconsideration?

I cannot say; but if a memorial is presented they are immediately reconsidered.

Does not the Lord Lieutenant act on the advice of his Chief Secretary in exercising the prerogative of mercy?

No, Sir; he does not.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a team selected from twenty Irishmen representing all Ireland has won the Elcho Shield at rifle shooting; whether these men are prevented from competing for the Queen's Prize because the law prohibits Volunteer corps in Ireland; and whether he proposes to enrol Volunteers in Ireland or establish rifle clubs where all who so desire may have an opportunity of learning rifle shooting.

I am aware that the Elcho Shield has been won this year by an Irish team. The second para- graph correctly assumes that legislation would be necessary for the establishment of Volunteer corps in Ireland. The question of the formation of rifle clubs should be addressed to the War Department.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether passengers arriving at Queenstown from the United States are asked by a policeman for their names and destination, and these duly noted; whether similar information is taken at Liverpool, Southampton, or any other British port at which American passengers are landed; and if not, why it is obtained at Queenstown, and passengers landing on Irish soil treated differently to those arriving in great Britain.

I am informed that the fact is as stated in the first part of the question. The information is freely given by passengers and has only once been refused during the last twelve months. The practice has existed for twenty years. I am unable to say whether similar information is taken at ports outside Ireland.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a Return of all rules and orders made or issued under or in consequence of the Local Government (Ireland) Act since last year's Return.

Yes, the further Return referred to will be laid upon the Table.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the failure of a motion on behalf of the Crown, made last Tuesday at the Mayo Assizes at Castle-bar, to commit Mr. William O'Brien for contempt of court; whether he is aware that, so far back as October, 1882, legislation for the curtailment of the power of arbitrary committal for contempt of court was promised in the House of Commons by the Prime Minister of the day; and whether, having regard to the remarks of the Chief Justice of England in April, 1896, and to the fact that one man has actually suffered imprisonment for 743 days for that offence, the Government will take steps for the introduction of legislation to define the power of judges to commit for contempt of court, and to render that power subject to appeal.

With respect to the first paragraph, the article published in the journal named the Irish People, in reference to which the application was made, was, in the words of the judge, calculated to prejudice the fair trial of a pending criminal prosecution and to interfere with the fair course of justice, but the failure of the application was due to the fact that though this journal had for months previously been advertised throughout the county Mayo as edited by Mr. William O'Brien, that gentleman, to the astonishment, I think, of everybody, denied on oath that he was editor in the ordinary sense, and repudiated all responsibility for the contents of the paper. As respects the second and third paragraphs, I must refer the hon. Member to my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury.

Did not the learned judge express his regret that he could not grant costs against the Crown?

I am told that that is not the case.

He said he had no statutory power.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he can state whether a site has yet been purchased for a post office in Castlebar, county Mayo; and, if so, what progress has been made with regard to the erection of the proposed building.

The site for a new post office at Castlebar has now been decided upon, and arrangements will be made for building as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that letters for some time past have been irregularly delivered in the townland of Cornalaragh, county Monaghan, near Carrickmacross, and district; and whether, seeing that a house to house delivery in this neighbourhood has been long promised, he can state why this promise has not been carried out.

Inquiry shall at once be made as regards the postal delivery in the townland of Cornalaragh, and as good a service shall be afforded as the circumstances warrant.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that the letter box at Mr. Francis Lambe's, Greaghlone, Carrickmacross, county Monaghan, has not been visited by a postman for several days past; and, whether he can explain the reason of this, neglect, and if he will take steps that this state of things will not occur again in this thickly populated district.

The Postmaster General regrets that, owing to a local misunderstanding, the letter box at Greaghlone was not cleared for some days recently. Direetions have been given for the box to be cleared regularly in future, and at a later hour than formerly.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether any step has been taken to ascertain the cost of providing a lake in the Phoenix Park such as is provided to enhance public enjoyment in Hyde Park and St. James's Park, and what are the respective areas of these three parks.

An estimate is being prepared, but important questions arise as to the source from which water should be taken and on other points which cannot be settled without some delay. The Board of Works are looking into the subject thoroughly. The area of the Phoenix Park is 1,752 acres. The area of Hyde Park is 360 acres, and of St. James's Park 93 acres.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he would ask the keepers of the London parks to furnish the keeper of Phoenix Park with a list of the ornamental trees and shrubs grown in St. James's Park and the Green Park, and give authority for any expense that may be entailed in providing for the planting of similar trees and shrubs in Phoenix Park.

A list of the ornamental trees and shrubs which have done well in the London parks shall be sent to the Board of Works, who will decide how far they are suitable for the Phoenix Park also.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Congested Districts Board have built a pier at Sneem, county Kerry, at a cost of £1,500, and that a goods store is a necessity on or near the pier for the protection and storage of goods; whether he is aware that the Congested Districts Board, the trading companies calling at the pier, and the people of the locality wore prepared to erect this store, and that the erection of the storehouse was prevented by Mr. Warden, the local landlord; and, can he state what steps the Government will take to compel Mr. Warden to allow the goods store to be built for protection of goods and use of the trading public.

The Congested Districts Board, in 1898, built a quay at Sneem, at a cost of £1,158. The Board proposed, in Ma}7, 1899, to erect a shed on the quay for the accommodation of the public, but decided to take no further steps in the matter on learning from Mr. Warden that the owners of the property adjoining the quay contemplated building a store themselves. No representations have since been made to the board on the matter. The Government have no power to take any steps such as suggested in the last paragraph.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what objection Mr. Warden has to the Congested Districts Board building a store?

We do not know that Mr. Warden has any objection. We have received no representations from the district.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture for Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the importation of Russian eggs into Ireland, and their subsequent exportation as Irish eggs to. England; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made as to this system, and take steps to prevent its continuance.

The attention of the Department has been drawn to the recent representations in the public press as to the alleged importation of Russian eggs into Ireland, and their subsequent exportation as Irish eggs. The matter is being inquired into.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that these eggs, do not reach the House of Commons?

That is the duty of the Kitchen Committee.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture for Ireland whether his Department has issued leaflets to stock-owners containing instructions to prevent the warble fly from harassing and injuring cattle; and whether he intends to introduce legislation making it a penal offence for stock-owners to omit taking simple precautions to prevent the suffering caused by the warble fly to cattle and the loss to the sellers and buyers of hides.

A leaflet has been issued by the Department containing instructions how to prevent the warble fly from harassing and injuring cattle. I do not think this pest can be dealt with by legislation.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. Convention, signed at the Hague, has been yet ratified by the Powers of Europe; if not, when is the Convention expected to be ratified.

The ratifications of Great Britain, France, Austro-Hungary, Russia, Italy, Spain, and the United States are at present in the custody of the Netherlands Government, but the date of the ratification has not yet been definitely settled. It will probably be early in September.

Can the Leader of the House now state anything definite as to the business on Tuesday, and also when the Supplementary Army Estimate will be in the hands of Members? It ought to be in our hands a considerable time before the statement is made.

On Tuesday I find it is impossible for my right hon. friend the Secretary for the Colonies to have the Papers in the hands of Members in sufficient time to discuss the Colonial Office Vote. My original arrangement would, therefore, appear to be satisfactory—namely, to take the Colonial Office Vote on Tuesday next.

When shall we have the Papers?

I hope they will be in the hands of Members on Monday morning.

The Papers requisite to discuss the Foreign Office Vote cannot be in the hands of Members in time for the discussion on Tuesday, and therefore I will not put down the Vote for that day. It will in all probability stand first on the last day of Supply, probably Thursday week. I will put down after the Colonial Office Vote the other Votes in Class II. My hon. friend the Under Secretary for War hopes to have the terms of the Supplementary Estimate in the hands of Members on Monday, but, in any case, on Tuesday.

Will there be any opportunity of discussing the Ashanti Vote?

That will come after the Colonial Vote, as usual.

I rise, Sir, for the purpose of bringing before the Committee the unsatisfactory condition of primary education in Ireland. This House has given, and rightly given, a great deal of its time and attention to the question of education in Great Britain, and it will be admitted that vast progress has been made for the last thirty years towards educational perfection in England, Scotland, and Wales. Old methods and old systems have given way to new methods and now systems, and although the change has been slow, it has been sure and steady, and to-day the British people of all grades, and especially the poorer portion of the people, enjoy an excellent, if not a perfect, system of education. I believe that England is. still behind the Continental countries in educational matters, but from year to year this House gives effect to legislation in the direction of improving it, and it may be said with truth that to-day the people of England, Scotland, and Wales have little to complain upon this question. But, Sir, how stands the case of Ireland? That is the question I wish to bring under the notice of the Committee, and I ask for its indulgence while I attempt to do so. I have seen what has been done for education in these countries within the last thirty years—old ideas and systems, as I have said, giving way to new ideas and systems; but in Ireland I have seen, during all those years, old-fashioned ideas and old-fashioned and stupid systems maintained and adhered to with, I may say, surprising tenacity and obstinacy. The same books that were in use in the so-called National schools when I was a boy are in use there to-day. One set of school books, one system of examination, one narrow set of ideas, one narrow groove. It is true that in their new rules just laid before Parliament the Commissioners have some important and satisfactory changes; but while the countries of the whole world have been for years alive to the necessity and importance of education, the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland have remained ignorant or indifferent to the necessity and importance of having the people of Ireland properly and intelligently educated. But, Sir, I do not purpose discussing in detail the out-of-date and stupid National school system of education in Ireland, nor shall I criticise the new rules. There is one phase of it, and one alone, that I want to dwell upon to-day, and that is the policy of the Commissioners of Education in ignoring the advantages of the bilingual system of instruction in those parts of Ireland where the Irish language is in general use and may be said to be the home language. Hon. Gentlemen in this House who know anything of the Welsh educational system, or who have acquired other languages than their own, will recognise the necessity and the advantage of the bilingual system, and although its importance has been urged, and strongly urged, upon the Irish Educational Commissioners, this old-fashioned and obsolete body ignore the representations made to them on this matter; and therefore, Sir, we are compelled to bring this all-important and vital subject for the proper education of our people before this Parliament. Hon. Members may be aware that this Irish language question has engaged and is engaging the anxious attention of the people of Ireland. It is a most important question, and the sooner Parliament realises that fact and deals with it the better. We look at this question from two standpoints. We believe that as a separate entity, if I may say so; as a separate and distinct nationality; as a Celtic people, we should speak our own Celtic language. I shall not go into the policy and the methods adopted by this country in the past in penalising the Irish language, but the Irish people are now determined to restore that language as far as it is in their power to do so, so that future generations of Irishmen will be able to speak their own language just as the people of Wales to-day speak their Welsh tongue. This Parliament can help in that direction, and this Parliament is bound to recognise and respect—if it acts constitutionally—the wishes of the Irish people. That is our first standpoint. The second standpoint from which we view this question is the urgent necessity for properly educating our children in those Irish-speaking districts where Irish is the home language. The present system is altogether wrong in principle and most pernicious in its effects. It is utterly im- possible to acquire a proper knowledge of the subjects taught in those schools in the Irish speaking districts unless the bi-lingual system is adopted. I want that fact to be thoroughly realised by the Committee, and to enable the Committee to fully appreciate it, perhaps it will allow me to quote a few passages from the report of Mr. Leggard one of Her Majesty's Chief Inspectors of Schools in Wales. I believe efforts have been made to teach the Welsh children through the medium of English, but it has been fully recognised of late that that system was a hopeless failure, and now I believe that the bilingual system is universally adopted in the Principality. What does Mr. Leggard say in his report for 1898?

"No system can really flourish unless it is supported by national sentiment and unless it has won the affections of the people. In the case of Wales, it is clear, I think, that education has got a real hold of the popular sympathies, just as it has in the northern part of Great Britain.

"It would be well to bear in mind that in some of the Welsh-speaking districts the children never hear a word of English outside the schools, and so the English language is something quite apart from their daily life and interests, and is merely a vehicle for school lessons. … Should it not be frankly recognised that English is a foreign language, and that it should be taught by the best methods of teaching foreign languages? Welsh children should not merely learn bookish English, but they should be encouraged from the infants' school upwards to talk in the foreign tongue about things that interest them—their homes, their games, their pet animals; and when a vocabulary is acquired simple rules of grammar will gradually be deduced, and the children will be trained in due course by speaking correctly to write correctly. Instruction in English on the lines I have indicated should help Welsh children to appreciate better their own mother tongue. …

"For Welsh-speaking districts such explanatory instruction (on other subjects beside reading) should in the earlier years of school life be to a great extent given in the vernacular, and the children will thus be able to assimilate what they hear. This they cannot do while they are puzzled by the unfamiliar sounds of an unknown tongue."

Mr. L. J. Roberts, one of Mr. Leggard's colleagues, in his report for the same year, remarks—

"The use of bilingual reading-books systematically throughout a school helps to do away with the difficulties of the Welsh child. He gains self-confidence, he sees delicate varieties of meaning which he could not otherwise grasp, his taste for reading in both languages is developed, and the mere practice of comparing the idioms of two languages is itself a valuable mental exercise."

Mr. Jones, another colleague of Mr. Leggard, says in his report—

"The future of Welsh education is very promising, and the Welsh people have now placed within their reach educational advantages which were undreamt of at the beginning of the century."

Can that be said of Ireland? I ask again: Can that be said of Ireland? and if not, why not? That is the question. I now come to a report by Mr. Darlington, another Welsh school inspector. Mr. Darlington says—

"I feel strongly that reading as at present taught is not doing as much as it might do in the direction of stimulating the general intelligence of the scholars. The fact that in teaching a Welsh child to read English we are really teaching him the use of a foreign language is at present not sufficiently taken into account, and one feels too often that a mechanical fluency in reading English is accompanied by the vaguest possible notion of the sense of the passage read. The use of bilingual readers has done much to make the reading lesson a more intelligent exercise. Still more satisfactory results are obtained in schools where the practice of oral translations forms a regular part of the reading lesson."

These reports, from which I have given only, a few extracts, are taken from the general report of Mr. Leggard, the Chief Inspector. Mr. Leggard concludes his enlightened and interesting report in these words—

"I will only say in conclusion that the state of elementary education in Wales is full of encouragement, provided those concerned with it do not rest contented with their achievements in the past, but endeavour to make steady and united progress in the future."

I am sure hon. Members will agree with me that there should be no further necessity for me to argue the point as to the advantages of the bilingual system where English is not the home language. I have quoted from the reports of several Welsh school inspectors in support of my case, and now I shall quote from a solitary Irish Commissioner—Dr. Starkie, who stands alone, or almost alone, in the wilderness of prejudice, ignorance, and antediluvianism which surrounds the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland. Dr. Starkie, in a speech last February, used these words—

"The National Board had made a disastrous blunder in thrusting on a Gaelic-speaking race a system of education produced after a foreign model and utterly alien to their sympathies and antecedents. The attempt was unsound (he continued), both philosophically and practically. The Board were guilty of narrow pedantry in neglecting as worthless the whole spiritual life of the pupil, and the multitude of associations, imaginations, and sentiments that formed the content of his consciousness. To this unhappy blunder may be attributed the want of initiative and independence, and distaste of knowledge, which so hamper the industrial development of Ireland—qualities so alien to the quick sympathies and alert intelligence which are the most salient characteristics of our race."

It is quite refreshing to come across an Irish official with such broad, enlightened, and patriotic views. As far as I know, there is only one Nationalist on this educational board—Archbishop Walsh, and not only is he a Nationalist but he is a man of great culture, and he is a strong advocate for the bilingual system. Who are the other Commissioners? The present members are the following—

I desire to second the motion which has been made by my hon. friend in the admirable speech which he has just delivered. I confess that I regret that there is such a scanty attendance in the House, because it is impossible to conceive a subject which more deeply interests the people of Ireland than the one which is now under discussion. Sir, Ireland takes a keen interest in this question, because Ireland believes that the whole future of the Irish race may be said to be largely bound up with this question. In the whole history of English misgovernment in Ireland I believe there is no such glaring instance as this of flagrant disregard of the unanimous public opinion of the country and of obstinate stupidity in a disastrous course. This matter concerns the people of Ireland vitally, because it concerns the education of the great mass of the poorer children in Ireland—that is, those who will be the future Irish nation. Now, Sir, allow me, without repeating any of the arguments used by my hon. friend in moving this motion, to state in my own words as concisely as I can what the case is we desire to present to the House. Roughly speaking, it is estimated that there are some 700,000 Irish-speaking people in Ireland, and it is estimated that there are some 70,000 Irish children attending the National schools who do not know one single syllable of English. Now, Sir, for these 70,000 children there is no provision whatever.

Do I understand the hon. Gentleman to say that there are 70,000 children in Ireland at the present time who are unable to speak a word of English?

I say it is estimated that there are 70,000 children attending these National schools—perhaps I put it a little too far in saying that they do not know a syllable of English— who know little or no English, and whose home language is Irish.

According to the census of 1891 the total number of Irish-speaking persons in Ireland was only 31,121.

I still maintain that the figures I have given to the Committee are correct. But, after all, it is a question of degree; and if the right hon. Gentleman supposes that his figures are right and the figures supplied to me are wrong, how far will that bring him in refusing? Because if it is only a question of 36,000 children, or of 30,000 children, or of 20,000 children, still the case would be a monstrous one if no provision whatever is to be made for the proper teaching of these children. But it is not merely that there is no special provision whatever for the teaching of these children, whose home language is Irish, but there is no provision whatever in other districts, where Irish is not so much spoken, to enable Irish to be taught as a remunerated subject in school hours. The case which we make is this: that in all places—I speak not now of children who cannot speak a word of English—but in all cases, in all districts where the home language is Irish, the children from those homes going into the National schools should be taught to read and write their own language, and should be taught English through the medium of their own language; and in the second place that Irish ought to be taught in all schools of Ireland as a remunerated subject in school hours wherever the circumstances of the school, in the opinion of the managers, warranted it. That is the demand, stated as concisely as I think it is possible to state it. Let me ask now who makes the demand. Sir, I believe it would be impossible to find a demand made with more complete unanimity from the people of Ireland than this one. In the first place, let me point out that the demand has been formally brought before the Board of National Education in Ireland on a memorial from the managers of 1,200 National schools in the Irish-speaking districts. It is supported, as my hon. friend has mentioned, by the declarations of the Irish bishops. I may be allowed to repeat what the Irish bishops have said. This is the unanimous resolution passed by the Catholic bishops of Ireland—

"We strongly recommend that in the primary schools in all Irish-speaking districts the instruction should be bilingual, English being taught through the medium of Irish. We also regard it as most desirable in the primary schools of other districts that the Irish language should be taught to the children in the third and the higher classes wherever the managers of the schools deem it advisable, and the parents make no objection."

And in addition to the unanimous declaration of all the Catholic bishops in Ireland, there are members of the Protestant Episcopacy who take the same view; and some of them—one of whom has recently passed away (I mean the late Dr. Greaves)—take a most passionate interest in this question. Almost all the public-elected boards in Ireland have made similar expressions. Corporations, county councils, district councils, town commissions, urban and district councils, who have spoken—and many of them have spoken on the question—have given expression to the same view. There is also the unanimous declaration laid before the Board of National Education from the clerical managers of the schools in the province of Connaught, which is the province chiefly concerned in this demand. Then there is the declaration which has been alluded to by my hon. friend, made by the executive of the National Teachers' Association—that is to say, the men who are engaged in the practical work of teaching in the schools, and who, so far from raising any objection, desire that this concession should be made, and that Irish should be taught in their schools. The same demand comes from the National Teachers' Congress, held the other day in the city of Derry. The Irish Members of Parliament are unanimous in supporting this demand. I do not know whether there is any individual Irish Member of Parliament who has any objection to Irish being taught in the National schools, but I have never heard of one; certainly it is safe to say that the overwhelming majority of Irish Members of all parties in this House take the same view. Perhaps the most remarkable testimony that this view is a sound one has come from the ranks of the National Board itself. Dr. Starkie has been alluded to, and my hon. friend has quoted some of his words. I am not going back upon them now, although perhaps I may have again to allude to them before I conclude; but I would point out that this demand conies from the most responsible Commissioner of the Board of National Education in Ireland, backing up the unanimous request from every public body and every representative of public opinion in Ireland. And, Sir, I can quote the Chief Secretary as a friend to this demand. My hon. friend quoted a declaration which the Chief Secretary made some years ago; but this very session the right hon. Gentleman, if I am not mistaken, in answer to a question across the floor of the House, made a most friendly declaration. He did not perhaps go the extreme length that some advocates of the Gaelic revival in Ireland go, but he made a most sympathetic-answer, because he said first he fully believed that where Irish was the language of the children their education could be more fully carried out through the medium of their own language.

Hear, hear!

That, no doubt, refers to children who come from Irish-speaking homes. In the second place, the Chief Secretary went on to say—

"While I could not undertake to artificially stimulate the study of Irish, yet if there is a widespread demand for its teaching I would not stand in the way."

Therefore, Sir, I think I am justified in quoting the right hon. Gentleman himself as a friend to the demand which is now made. Now, Sir, I think I have said enough to show that it would be quite impossible to conceive a demand more influentially put forward and more universally supported in Ireland than this demand which we put forward to-day. It is supported by every class of the population; it is supported by the hierarchy and the clergy of not one, but, I believe, of all denominations in Ireland. It is supported by the managers of the schools, by the teachers of the schools, by the elected representatives of the people, whether in this House or in the public boards, throughout the country, and I think I am justified, therefore, in my assertion that no more influential demand was ever made in this House. Having stated what the demand is, and why we are making it, let me consider whether the demand is in itself reasonable, moderate, and based upon precedent, and whether it is not really one which, from an Irish point of view, should be considered in the general interest of the country. Is it reasonable. The present system of teaching in the Irish-speaking districts has been proved by bitter experience to be useless, and that is the explanation of the alarming proportion of illiterates which obtains? in many districts of Ireland. The whole experience of this attempt to teach English through the medium of English to children who come from Irish-speaking homes has been to show that these children, after they leave school, rapidly lapse into illiteracy. All experience proves that the bilingual system of education for such districts is the best. I am loth to trouble the House, but I would like to read one or two sentences from a very weighty memorial which has been presented to the National Board of Education from the managers of 1,200 schools. That memorial has been treated with the scantiest courtesy, and so far as I can see has received no answer at all. These gentlemen, Protestant and Catholic alike included in the list of the managers of 1,200 schools, say—

"The children of these districts come from Irish-speaking homes, where all the familiar converse of life, and, still more, all the higher and more spiritual ideas, are habitually expressed by their parents and elders in Irish. The first foundations, and the most important part of the mental development of the children are thus naturally made in the Irish language. We consider it to be a radical error, on the entrance of the children into school, to completely ignore the natural foundations thus laid, and to commence de novo their education in an unfamiliar language. To ignore the utility of Irish in teaching these children from the out-set, is, in our opinion, a primary blunder for many reasons. It is in itself an unnatural and irrational method of education. It deliberately puts on one side all that the children may have learned not alone of the vocabulary of common life, but of the finer shades of thought and feeling which are eminently characteristic of the Irish language. It also puts aside the spiritual traditions of the Irish language, leaving their place to be supplied by what should only supplement them, and could be made to supplement them, in Irish as well as, or better than, in English—namely, direct memorised instructions. Experience has shown that the native traditional taste for poetry and other forms of literature and for music is taken away from the people along with their native language. A still more grievous evil is that their respect for home, parents, national traditions, and the past of their own people is undermined by the present system, and thus the foundations of the civic virtues of self-respect and self-reliance, so conducive to the welfare of a people, are shaken from the commencement. It often happens under the present system that after a number of years at school young people practically lapse into illiteracy, and forget how to read and write simple English. Even of those who may seem to have profited more a large number have little better than a mechanical proficiency, and from the standpoint of material advancement are hardly to be distinguished from the class of illiterates. We believe that these defects in education will be removed by teaching the children to read and write, and utilise to its fullest capacity the language in common use among the grown people in these districts. This belief is not grounded solely on a priori reasons, but is fully borne out by the experiences of primary education in Great Britain, where for some years the Welsh language has been employed in education in the way in which we seek to have Irish employed."

I ought, perhaps, to apologise for reading so lengthy an extract, but the sound reasonable argument contained in it deserves the serious attention of all interested in the education of the young in Ireland. For my part I do not know what is the answer to it. Dr. Starkie, Resident Commissioner of National Education, has spoken much to the same effect. He says—

"The cause is not far to seek why the National system has not had the full measure of success which its friends would desire for it. From the first its besetting sin has been centralisation. From the centre in Dublin the National Hoard, disregarding all differences of race and creed and local prejudices, has imposed on all parts of the country a rigid programme, perhaps ideally satisfactory, but in many cases ludicrously ill adapted to the needs of the backward districts of Ireland, and to the capacities of the pupils. As an illustration of my meaning I may refer to the treatment accorded to what seventy years ago was really the national tongue. Without committing myself to the extravagances of some of the enthusiasts of the Gaelic League, I fancy few practical educationalists will deny that the National Board were guilty of a disastrous blunder in thrusting upon a Gaelic-speaking race a system of education produced after a foreign model and utterly alien to their sympathies and antecedents. Such an attempt was unsound, both philosophically and practically. Neglecting the principle of continuity which pervades all human things, it disregarded the home training and associations of the children, and thus rending in twain the nascent intelligence, rendered all real development impossible. True education is a refining and developing of the whole intellectual life and character, and I think there can be little doubt that the Hoard were guilty of narrow pedantry in neglecting as worthless the whole previous spiritual life of the pupil, and the multitude of associations, imaginations, and sentiments that formed the content of his consciousness. The consequences of such a system are inevitable. To this unhappy blunder may be attributed the want of initiative and independence, and distaste of knowledge, which so hampers the industrial development of Ireland—qualities so alien to the quick sympathies and alert intelligence which are the most salient characteristics of our race."

I saw yesterday in The Times a most interesting letter from Mr. Edmund Gosse, in which he speaks of the Irish language in this way—

"Irish has been in literary use for centuries, which has held the thoughts of generations of great men, which has preserved a poetry of singular mystery and tenderness. Whether we read Irish or not—for my part I am with the Saxon majority—that tongue has been for centuries an unseen but priceless appanage of British literature. The language of Ireland has been blossoming there unseen, like a hidden garden of roses, and, whenever the wind Has blown from the West, our English poetry has felt the vague perfume of it."

It is interesting to know that even the most vehement opponents of the study of Irish, such as Dr. Atkinson and others like him, still admit that children coming from whore Irish is the familiar language ought to be taught English through the medium of Irish. Dr. Atkinson went before the Commission as the great opponent of the Gaelic revival, and yet he used these words—

"These children should be taught Irish, and they would learn it with very great advantage because they speak it from their childhood …If they spoke it, then it would be right to teach them in their own mother tongue. It is wrong to children not to teach them in their mother tongue … If they know Irish better than English coining into the school, let their education be Irish. If the child thinks in the Irish language, let him be taught in the Irish language."

Surely I have said enough to show that the demand which is made is in itself a reasonable one, and that it has the support of the most eminent educational authorities in Ireland. Let me ask for a moment whether the demand is without precedent. We are not asking for anything strange, extravagant, or unheard of. As a matter of fact, we are asking for that which is to-day possessed by Wales, and not more than is possessed by the Highlands of Scotland. I want to know by what constitutional theory can this demand, put forward by practically every class and creed in Ireland, and proved to be reasonable in the opinion of skilled educationalists, is to be refused, and why an irresponsible body of men nominated by the Crown, or a majority of them, is to insist in excluding this Irish language from our schools in spite of the universal desire of the people of Ireland? What we ask for to-day is less than exists in Wales. In the Welsh Code for 1900, it is set forth that the Welsh language is one of the subjects which may be taken up if it suits the circumstances of the schools, and the managers approve. Then, in the standard of examinations on elementary subjects there is dictation from Cymric reading-books. In Welsh translations from English, the written examination may be in both English and Welsh, and there is history reading both in Welsh and English. Further, I find that English is to be taught bilingually. Special provision is also made for the training of the teachers in Welsh, and in their examinations they are obliged to be able to read Welsh and recite Welsh poetry. Under the head of history, the teachers must show a knowledge not only of English history, but of the history of Wales prior to the union with England; and further, submit to a test of their knowledge of the history of Wales generally. I want to know why all this should be given to Wales and denied to Ireland. All that we ask is that the bilingual system of teaching should be set up in Irish-speaking districts where the children come from Irish-speaking homes, and that in other districts Irish may be one of the remunerated subjects taught, if the managers so desire it, in the school hours. The Scotch Code makes almost precisely the same provision. In the Gaelic-speaking districts, that is, in the counties of Inverness, Argyll, Ross and Cromarty, and Sutherland, an extra pupil-teacher is allowed in respect of bilingual teaching, and provision is made also for the teaching of Gaelic in the training colleges. It seems to me that a demand put forward as this has been, and supported by all classes of the people of Ireland, proves to be reasonable and based on the precedents of Scotland and Wales, and that the contemptuous rejection of that demand by this nominated, irresponsible, and intensely anti-national Board is a most monstrous thing, which the House of Commons ought not to tolerate for one instant. There is another aspect of the question which appeals to us Irishmen, however it may appeal to English Members. At this moment—and there is no use of the Chief Secretary underrating the feeling of the Irish—an intense and passionate movement exists in favour of saving the remnants of the Irish tongue for the Irish people of the future. It is natural, because to all Irishmen, whatever their class, or creed, or politics, who are proud of their country, of its history, of its traditions, when in the old times, almost alone among Western nations, Ireland held aloft the lamp of learning and cherished the truths of religion, this neglect of the ancient tongue of their forefathers must seem an unpardonable wrong; and I say in a special way to all those who love the songs and stories and folk lore of Ireland, to all those—

"Who love a nation's legends,

Love the ballads of a people,

That, like voices from afar off,

Speak in tones so plain and childlike,

Scarcely can the ear distinguish

Whether they are sung or spoken "—

to all such who treasure poetry, the romance and the music of their country, as things which give individuality and character to their race, and almost a soul to their nation—to all such men, this wanton attempt to destroy the Irish tongue must seem an outrage and a sacrilege. The injury to Ireland is a material and a moral one at the same time. This system undoubtedly dwarfs the intellects and stunts the minds of the young children of Ireland, on whom will depend the future well-being and prosperity of the country. It deprives them of all knowledge of a glorious past, and shuts them out from the slightest glimpse of the poetic and romantic literature, and it places upon them the humiliating badge of inferiority. This authority in Ireland must not be permitted to do this wrong, and we are here to appeal to every independent Member of the House to aid in preventing this wrong being perpetrated in future. We appeal in an especial way to those kinsmen of ours of the Celtic race who are here from Scotland and Wales. We ask them to assist us in putting an end to this wrong, and in helping us to do for our country what they have succeeded in doing for their own—to protect the ancient tongue of our forefathers, in which is enshrined so much of the glorious heritage that has come down through the centuries to Ireland from her sages, her poets, her scholars, and her statesmen.

This is in no sense, in my opinion, a political question, but one which we may discuss quite freely, although we may take different views upon the subject; and I must say that with the views which have been expressed upon the opposite side of the House I disagree in every particular. That being so, I desire to put before the Committee the reasons which have led me to the conclusion at which I have arrived. The hon. Gentleman who moved this motion said everything that could possibly be said in its favour from that side of the House, and, although the seconder of the motion made an eloquent and most powerful speech, he did not add much, if anything, to the arguments already urged by the hon. Gentleman whom he supported. The mover of the motion made an attack on the books used in the schools of Ireland, and in that respect I entirely disagree with him. I have studied those books as a boy, and have since compared them with the books used in English schools, and I have come to the deliberate conclusion that there are no books anywhere which are better than those used by the National School Board of Ireland. There are several of the Irish school books which could not possibly be beaten for the purposes for which they are designed. But the question before the Committee is the question of the Irish language, and I only refer in passing to the books, and I say that I have not been able to agree with the observations with regard to them made by the hon. Gentleman. Coming to the Irish language itself, I think the bilingual system is an excellent one, and to learn two languages perfectly is far better than to learn half a dozen imperfectly. For a man to be able to speak two languages is a very great advantage; it broadens his mind, and enables him to enlarge his knowledge and acquire other subjects. But are two languages, properly learned, possible for the poor people of any country? Are there any countries where the working classes learn two languages? [A VOICE from the Irish benches: Yes— Wales.] In many parts of Wales it is true that Welsh is spoken as the mother tongue, and the people as they grow up acquire English; but take France or Germany, or any other Continental country. Are the poor people of those countries able to speak two languages? Docs such a thing exist anywhere?

Yes, in half a dozen places.

What about Antwerp?

I should certainly like to see that assertion proved, and Antwerp does not prove it. Those who have lived among Continental nations will admit they have never come across anything of the sort. Yon may go through the city of Paris, or Berlin, or other Continental cities from end to end before you find two mechanics who have really learned more than one language, and it is not for us in this House to make statements which are not borne out by the facts. [Interruption from the Irish benches.] Hon. Gentlemen will have an opportunity to prove the statement they make; but surely it is only fair that a man should be allowed to express his opinions with regard to the teaching of a language, even if they do not coincide with those of the hon. Gentleman opposite. I do not believe it is possible for the working people of any country to learn two languages, and I have not come across any who have. They have neither the time nor the inclination. But supposing it were possible for two languages to be taught, would it be wise for the Irish people to make the ancient language of their country the second one? Do the Irish people who send their children to expensive schools in Ireland make the Irish language one of the languages to be taught to their children? They have them taught French or German, but do they have them taught the Irish language? And is it wise to try to encourage the lower classes in a study of a language which the higher classes themselves have not learned and do not teach their children? If it were possible to learn any number of languages one would be very glad to have Irish taught as one of them; but the time for learning spoken languages is limited, and the number of languages one can learn is limited, and human intellect is limited, everywhere except among Irish Nationalists. Now, speaking of this particular language, we know that men and women of the better classes do not have their children caught Irish [Cries of "Oh, oh!"] I ask what member of the Irish party in this House is having his children taught Irish? I am very far from making an attack upon the Irish language. The hon. Member for East Mayo alluded to a man who spoke of Irish literature as disgusting and abominable. That is certainly the last charge I would make—for one reason, that I am not sufficiently familiar with Irish literature to make such an attack—nor do I think that any good is done by making an attack of that sort, especially as all Celtic scholars admit that the ancient Irish literature is much richer and more beautiful than the literature of any of the other five Celtic languages. We know that there are historical documents in the Irish language of the highest possible order, and poems—epic, lyric, and didactic—of unrivalled beauty and marvellous pathos: but there is a difference between teaching a language to a whole people and preserving the ancient documents of that language. Is anyone taught in Italy to speak the Latin which was spoken in ancient Rome? Yet it is not as a dead language, but as a living one, that hon. Gentlemen wish Irish to be caught. The mover of the motion spoke, in reference to the teaching of the Irish language, of its value. If he refers to its value to philologists, no one disagrees with him: but if he refers to its practical value, then I assert that it has hardly any value. It seems to me that the practical value of a language depends entirely upon the number of people who speak it.

Then Chinese should be the most valuable language in the world.

I am glad to be able to answer the hon. Gentleman upon that point. Only some two years ago a movement was started by many leading men in London to try and get Chinese taught even in preference to French or German, because of its greater commercial value. Of course, if a language is only to be learned for mere sentimental reasons, and not for reasons of travel, trade, or other practical purposes, we can well understand that a language which is spoken at the top of a mountain in Russia by about 150 people altogether would 'be the most valuable of languages, because it is one of the rarest and most peculiar. Speaking of European languages, would any man wish his children to be taught Portuguese in preference to French or Italian or Spanish? And yet Portuguese is an excellent language. Is not the feeling of all men who have to do with the study of modem languages to go in this direction when they say that the more a language is what they call a world speech or umgangsprache language, the more is that language one that ought to be learned? Discussion is often carried on as to whether German or French is the more valuable language—that is, which affects the larger number of people? If a man is to have only one language, I think it is clear-to everyone that the most valuable language he can have is English, and next to that is French, because French will serve you in a greater number of the countries of the world than any other language except English. Except for sentimental reasons it would be absolutely valueless to teach the Celtic language in Ireland. The value of a language depends not merely on the use you can make of it not in your own country, but of the use you can make of it when you leave your own country. [Laughter.] I must say that I fail entirely to see what is in the minds of hon. Members. If I were going to travel I would certainly very much prefer that my own; language was English rather than Portuguese. Portuguese may be a better language from the grammarian's point of view than English, but it would not serve me one-twentieth as much as English would do. If a language is to serve the purpose for which it was intended—namely, that men may convey their ideas to the men whom they meet — necessarily, the greater the number of people who speak a language the more the value of that language to men who are going about the world and doing the business of the world. The mover of the motion spoke of the value of the Irish language. But what real value has it? If he wants the people of Ireland to learn a Continental language he will recollect how much they would be handicapped from the entire absence of books for teaching French, German, or Italian, or any Continental language through the medium of the Irish language. It has been argued—I do not know whether it was referred to in this debate—as one strong reason in favour of teaching the Celtic language that the Jews, who are passionately attached to their own religion and nationality, teach the Hebrew language as well as the language of the country in which they are placed. That is easily explained. They never teach colloquial or cursive Hebraic. They teach the language of their prayers and of ecclesiastical documents, but they do not teach their children colloquial Hebrew as they teach them French or German. So that if any argument is to be drawn from what the Jews do, it would prove that the Irish people should teach their children Latin, that being the language of the prayers and ecclesiastical documents of the Church of the large majority of the people of Ireland. The first question to settle is, what is the purpose for which you desire the second language? Is it for sentiment or for practical purposes? If it is for sentiment, can Ireland in her present commercial and financial position afford to sacrifice practical utility to sentiment'? If the second language is wanted for practical purposes, then comes the question, what do other nations do which have an ancient language still lingering among a few of the lower orders of the people and yet have as the real language of the people some imported tongue? What do practical and prosperous peoples do in such circumstances? Take the case of the Belgians. Their ancient language is Flemish. They do not teach French through Flemish, they do not teach Flemish at the expense of French. I had an opportunity, when in Belgium not long ago, of hearing a number of classes examined, and I was told that there is a desire there on the part of educationists to relegate the Flemish language to the category of ancient history, and to make the French language the speech to be used in the country. We know that the Belgians are, perhaps, the most practical people in the whole of Europe. We are told that there are no people so successful according to their numbers, or who make so good a use of life's opportunities generally. That is the experience of highly practical men in connection with an extremely energetic people, and the example of the Belgians is very much in point when Irishmen are discussing this question not from a political but from a purely practical point of view, as showing what is best for the country in its practical interests. If Irish were spoken as much as English in America, Australia, and other countries where Irishmen go, I should certainly think then there was something to be said for making Irish the language of the country. I do not suppose Irish is a worse language from any point of view, but I look at this question from the practical side, and we cannot get over the fact that Irish is not spoken elsewhere. A good deal has been said about the advantage of teaching English as far as possible through Irish to the pupils in Irish schools. I may be in an extreme minority in this matter—I fancy that the Chief Secretary is probably against me—but that would not he my aim. If I were to-morrow going to loam a foreign language I should prefer to be taught that language through itself, and to make what effort I could to understand it. I believe I would arrive at a knowledge of that language quicker in that way. The hon. Member for South Donegal seems to be highly amused by that statement, but after all, a great many Members of the House have done exactly what I have said. Numerous Members of the House have gone to foreign countries without knowing the language at all. They did not go to lodge with an English family to learn French, or German because they were English-speaking people. No; they plunged into a foreign house altogether, and picked up the language as well as they could, that being the quickest way in which the language could be acquired, so that by only teaching English through Irish in the schools in Ireland yon would not adopt the quickest mode of acquiring a knowledge of English. The people of Ireland, as regards their relation to the Irish language, are of three classes: first, those who do not know Irish, which is nine-tenths of the people; second, those who know and speak both English and Irish; and thirdly, some thirty or forty thousand who know only Irish. The first class had better leave Irish alone; the second class had better cultivate the English, and the third class had better learn English by mixing with English-speaking people. The hon. Member who moved the reduction of the Vote made what appeared to me to be a very extraordinary statement. He said that the teaching of the Irish language would bind the Irish abroad more closely to the Irish at home. No doubt he believed that was an argument, but I could not for the life of me see how it could possibly affect that question. For example, the Irish people who are scattered abroad in America and Australia do not know the Irish language. How the teaching of Irish as their mother tongue to the people of Ireland could draw them closer to the Irish people in America who do not know that language, and never desire or try to learn it, I fail entirely to understand. Indeed, it seems to me the very opposite would be the result. As a matter of fact, very few people in Ireland speak Irish alone. Very few indeed are dependent on the Celtic language, and very few of the peasantry are proud that they speak the two languages. The tendency is rather the other way—rather to deny that they know the Irish language than to admit that they do know it. Since so few people speak the Irish language in Ireland would it not be a monstrous thing to fetter the educational energies of the country by trying to revive a language which, if it once became the sole language, would be of the greatest disadvantage to the people of Ireland in their intercourse with other nations? Wales and the Welsh language have been referred to. But in Wales the Welsh language is spoken by the bulk of the people. Almost every Welsh Member addresses his constituents in Welsh. What Irish Member addresses his constituents in Irish? In Wales it is simply the question of keeping alive a living language, which the bulk of the people and nearly all the educated classes can speak and read; but in Ireland it is the question of reviving a language that is practically dead. You might as well try to make Latin the spoken and living language of Italy along with Italian. This idea of reviving the Irish language is an idle dream. Scholars may explore the treasure-houses of its literature, but it never can and never ought to be the language of the whole people. Lord Russell of Killowen is always a useful man to quote on your side, but he is not useful to quote on the other side. In this particular instance, as he is so strongly on my side, I may refer to a statement he made lately which has been published in all the papers. Speaking at a meeting of the Gaelic League he said the attempt to revive the Irish language was foolish from every possible point of view. My hon. friend asked—Is not this demand reasonable? I say, No, it is not. That is the point on which we differ at the very start. There are many demands which the Irish people could make with regard to education with which I might not be able to agree, and yet I would not say they were unreasonable. It docs not seem to me to be a demand that will ever be entertained by the Government. It may be discussed on antiquarian grounds in the House, but it is not one that will over be carried into force. I think it would be a very bad thing for the people of Ireland. The gentleman who opened this debate said that some of us opposed the Irish language because we thought that if the Irish people were to learn the Irish language Home would have more power over them. I cannot see how for that reason Rome could have more power over them, seeing that Rome does not know Irish. If Irish were the language of Rome I could understand it. We are not discussing a question of religion, but a question of language on its own merits, no matter how it might bear on any particular cause. It seems to me that one of the best possible tests of sincerity in this matter is to ask, what do hon. Gentlemen opposite do in the case of their own families? What does an educated, enlightened Irish Nationalist do in regard to his own family? That is the test of the whole thing. What has been done in his own education in this matter? The value of a foreign language, especially French, to anyone who has the opportunity of going abroad is immense, and if, though it would not be perhaps practicable, a demand were made by the Irish Nationalists in this House for a further sum in order to encourage the teaching of the French language I would be with them. My hon. and learned friend the Member for South Donegal knows the difficulty which travelling abroad involves. He knows perfectly well that even his immense knowledge of the Celtic language does not serve in the slightest degree. he knows try well how one of his countrymen—shall I say one of his own colleagues?— some time ago wanted to leave his luggage in the cloak-room at a railway station in Italy. This gentleman did not know Italian: he knew simply English and Irish, and a little Latin learned solely in graveyards. He procured the attendance of the station-master by the use of the word generalissimo, which he saw signed to a printed notice, and which he took to mean station-master, and he thought that the intelligent station-master would be so fond of the ancient language of his country that he would understand Latin. The traveller on the arrival of the station-master pointed to his luggage and said "Requiescat in pace," and then, pointing to himself, said "Resurgam." By this device ideas were exchanged—the luggage was "to rest in peace" till the traveller "rose again," or, in less poetic words, "came back to claim it." A little Italian would have been very valuable to the traveller, but not Celtic. In that case the Irishman knew the Celtic language, but not the language of the country he visited. I would advise my hon. friends opposite, instead of demanding to foist an impracticable language on the people, to turn their attention to other matters which would do a great deal more for the people. I would remind them that certain districts to which the hon. Member referred, where the Irish language is almost exclusively spoken, are also the poorest in Ireland. Was that in favour of the Irish language or against it? There are a great many districts in Donegal where a great many people speak the language, but does that save them from the poverty that exists in that country? I would feel myself in a far more happy condition if I wore able to support hon. Members from Ireland in something that would be for the good of the country, instead of having to take part in a debate year after year on an entirely worthless and foolish demand by gentlemen very few of whom understand or speak five sentences of the language about which they indulge in a long and empty and ludicrous debate.

I hope hon. Members from Ireland will not object to a Member from another part of the kingdom taking part in the debate for a few moments. The question they have raised is one of very wide and general interest to all parts of the United Kingdom. The question really has absolutely nothing to do with politics. It might have been a political object, or had some political influence and importance sixty or seventy years ago. I believe that Daniel O'Connell used to address large mass meetings in Ireland in the Irish language, and I rather think that the great gathering on the battlefield of Clontarf was to have been so addressed; but we know that now you could not find anybody speaking Irish alone within fifty miles of Clontarf. I do not think any newspapers are published in Irish. [AN HON. MEMBER: There are three newspapers.] Are they daily newspapers? [AN HON. MEMBER: Weekly newspapers.] A weekly newspaper nowadays is apt to be more in the nature of a magazine. There are no daily newspapers, and I have never heard of a vernacular press. [AN HON. MEMBER: Daily papers have columns in Irish.] I am glad to hear that. I was not aware of it. The vernacular press has, at any rate, never been supposed to be in any way a cause of political agitation. The other remark I want to make is that this is not a question of promoting the Irish language at the expense of the English. I do not understand that that is for a moment intended. The whole argument of the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has been directed to that point, and is therefore quite irrelevant. I do not think the Chief Secretary supposes that it is intended the teaching of English shall be in any way sacrificed to the teaching of Irish, or that anyone who does not use Irish as the home tongue shall be taught Irish in the schools unless be desires to learn it. It is not suggested that anywhere except in the Irish-speaking districts should the teaching of Irish become a regular part of the school work. Of course, obviously it is for the advantage of the children that they should be able to speak and read and write English. English will open for them a wider career in life than Irish possibly could. I believe that the Welsh Members think—and so far as I know, the Irish Members also think— that English will be positively better taught and understood if taught through Irish. I am not going to argue this question as a matter of national sentiment, or what you would call the sentimental value of language. Personally, I am under the influence of that sentiment. I own that it would seem to me a great misfortune if the ancient Celtic languages were altogether to disappear. I would be sorry to see Irish disappear and should have the same regret were Gaelic or Welsh to vanish. I know that in France there is the same wish not to let the ancient languages die out. There is a desire to keep the Breton and the Basque, and there has been an important revival of Provencal. One of the finest poems France has produced in the last fifty years is a poem, "Mireio," written in the old Provencal language. Therefore there is a great deal to be said for keeping the old language. At the same time I am bound to say with all respect to the distinguished Irish literary man who wrote an interesting letter to The Times a few days ago, that I do not think there is much prospect at this time of day of our succeeding in making the ancient Celtic language a vehicle for modern literature. It is a dangerous experiment to try to turn an ancient classical language into a modern one as respects either syntax or vocabulary. The genius of a modern people is too different from that of the ancients. The experiment has been tried in Greece, and modern Greek is not nearly so natural and self-consistent a language since they have endeavoured to make it classical and to bring in the old classical forms of expression. They would have done better to develop a good modern language out of their Romaic. However, I shall not attempt to argue this question upon these sentimental considerations, because although they appeal to some of us very strongly, and although I have the warmest sense of the splendour, the brilliance, and the imaginative power of the ancient Irish literature, an imaginative quality quite unique, and with a wild charm of the Western sea that is all its own; still I think these are arguments that do not appeal to everyone here; and if we have got a strong practical case—as I believe we have—for teaching the old Celtic languages, I would rather argue it on that basis and put considerations which may appeal to persons like the hon. Member who has just sat down. I come to the practical question, and that is this: can anything be done—usefully and practically done—to meet the demands of the Members from Ireland? My excuse for interfering in the debate is that I once had some experience on this subject. I had, thirty-four years ago, the honour of being assistant commissioner of a Royal Commission which was to examine into the endowed grammar schools of Wales. I had to make inquiry there as to the best way of dealing with a large number of Welsh-speaking boys in order to teach them both English and their own language. The testimony was that you teach English better and stimulate the general intelligence more if you use Welsh as well as English in the teaching, and if you teach Welsh as a cultivated language side by side with English. I dare say some of the Welsh Members present can give in their own experience a better illustration of this than I can. However, the Welsh clergymen and schoolmasters whom I consulted were all agreed that the bilingual system not only taught the children English better, but was useful in other respects. It is easy to see why that should be to, because when you take a child and begin to teach it another lan- guage in addition to its own language the child is obliged to transfer thought from one set of words to another, and in doing so is obliged to get a much move exact idea of the meaning of words, of the genius of a language, and of the nature of the transference of thought than it is possible to get in one language only. That is what we all do in learning Latin. We are obliged to turn our thoughts which we form in English into the form which the same thoughts would take in a different language, and that is one reason why I think no kind of instruction is more valuable than the writing of Latin prose, and the same thing applies in the case of English and Irish. Now I come to the hon. Member for East Down, who asked why we should begin to teach children a language which might be of no use to them. He asked whether there were any countries in Europe where the people speak two languages. Why, it is hard to find a country in Europe in which there are not many people using two languages.

I said the mechanics and working classes.

There are a great many parts of Europe where the working classes speak two languages. In Belgium a large number of people of the humbler class speak Flemish and French; in Denmark a large part of the peasantry speak German as well as Danish, and in France many of the population speak two languages. In Germany there are large districts where the national language of the population is Slav, but where many also speak German, and it is the same all through the Austrian Empire. In Hungary and Croatia and Dalmatia there is a large bilingual population.

And in the Italian Alps.

And as my right hon. friend reminds me, it is the same all through the valleys of the western part of the Italian Alps, where both French and Italian are spoken. The same thing is also true in Spain.

And Yorkshire.

If the hon. Member thinks that the language of Catalonia or Galicia differs no more from classical Castilian than the Yorkshire speech differs from classical English, he is much mistaken. The hon. Member for East Down says he cannot see why two languages should be taught when English is the language to be used. I would remind the hon. Member that the proposal is to teach English through the medium of the native language. The question is whether you should not make the best possible use of their native language. The hon. Member's idea is that you ought to teach English through English, which means that you are to address a child in a language which he does not understand. The truth is that it is a great piece of good fortune in training the minds of children that they should have a language already which they can use to enable them to compare the English, and they will not learn English any more slowly or any less thoroughly if they are taught it through Irish than if that language is neglected. Irish ought to be taught not as a vernacular, but as a literary language. You ought to have reading books in Irish, and the children ought to be accustomed to translate the Irish reading books into English and vice versa. In the training colleges in Scotland and in Wales special instruction is given to the teachers who are going to teach in the districts where Welsh or Gaelic is the common tongue to enable them to use Gaelic or Welsh as the vehicle of instruction. This ought to be done in Ireland also. I submit, therefore, that the demand which the Irish Members make is a very reasonable and moderate demand As for Celtic philology, that is rather a matter for higher secondary schools and universities, but I may point out that the larger the number of people to whom instruction is given in Irish, the more prospect is there that in after life some of them will avail themselves of it to study the language scientifically and to make use of the abundant and rich materials which exist for the study of ancient Irish history and Irish literature, materials which have been very sparingly and inadequately used so far. Many years ago I happened to spend a summer vacation in Ireland, where I obtained lessons in Irish—lessons which, to my regret, I have now forgotten—from the son of an Irish peasant who had developed a remarkable talent for philology, and who at that time promised to become—(he died long ago, before that promise could be fulfilled)—one of the ablest philologers in the United Kingdom. The instance of that man makes me believe that if we were to give the Irish-speaking population a chance of studying Irish as a literary language we might have a much larger number of persons studying Irish history and literature; and I think that it is an object with which everybody in this House who takes an interest in history and literature, whether he be an Irishman or not, will deeply sympathise. I must apologise for having detained the House so long, but without venturing to express an opinion upon the precise rules which ought to be made to meet the wishes of the Irish Members, I do think that they have made out a case for a much wider teaching of Irish then now exists, and I would suggest to the Chief Secretary that he should go fully into the subject. I think we are particularly fortunate in having a Chief Secretary who is himself a man of high literary ability and attainments, and who has, I feel sure, every sympathy with the study of Irish literature. If the right hon. Gentleman feels any doubt as to the best way in which this can be done, I hope that he will refer it for inquiry to those who have practical knowledge of the subject either in Wales or in Scotland, who are themselves men of educational experience, and that he will endeavour to induce the Commissioners to frame a scheme which will go far to meet the complaints made to-day, and thus turn the opportunities which Ireland offers in this matter to far better account.

I find myself in such distinct agreement with the speech of the right hon. Gentleman that I have hardly any criticism to offer to his very valuable contribution to the debate, except in one particular. I do not think the right hon. Gentleman has fully realised the nature and extent of the demand which has been made. The hon. Member for Waterford began his speech by saying that the whole future of the Irish race was bound up in this question. I think that statement alone will indicate to the right hon. Gentleman that he has somewhat minimised what is now being asked for. I think the right hon. Gentleman will hardly be prepared to say that this is a question involving the whole future of the Irish race. The reason why the hon. Member for Waterford dwells so much upon this question, involving the future of the Irish race, is because he believes that the large mass of the children in Ire-land speak the native language. When the hon. Member for Waterford quoted statistics upon this point, I interrupted him in the middle of his speech, because I thought the numbers which he gave to the Committee on this subject were extremely misleading. I have here an extract from the Report of the Census Commissioners of Ireland. From table 155 it will be seen that in 1881, 64,167 persons were returned as speaking Irish only, and that in 1891 the number so returned was 38,121, or 26,046 less than in 1881; also, that in 1881 the number of persons returned as able to speak Irish and English was 885,765, and that in 1891 it was 642,053, or 243,712 less than in 1881. It is perfectly clear that if the number of children affected by the changes asked for is confined to Irish-speaking districts it will not be anything like what the hon. Member for Waterford appears to imagine. The problem is not, therefore, such a very extensive one, and it must also be remembered that the numbers are diminishing at a very rapid rate. What, then, is the existing state of affairs? Since 1883 there has been a note in the Code of the Irish Commissioners which declares that where there are Irish-speaking pupils in the school a teacher acquainted with the Irish language should, wherever practicable, be employed, and that inspectors are at liberty to employ the vernacular if they think it desirable to do so. That note has been in the Code ever since 1883, and if it be true that, notwithstanding that, a knowledge of English has not been imparted through the vernacular, I think the managers must bear the larger share of the blame. The teachers are not appointed by the Board of Education, but by the managers, and, so far as I can see, there is really nothing in the old Code or in the new rules which have lately been issued to prevent the teaching of English through Irish. The hon. Member for Connemara has complained of the constitution of the Board of Education, but if anyone looks at the list of names upon that Board he will see that it includes some of the most distinguished men in Ireland, and for the hon. Member for Connemara to say that he does not know more than three or four of them is to argue himself unknown. If it he true that there is nothing to prevent bilingual teaching, we must hold that if there is any difficulty about it it is largely due to the fact that the matter has not been pressed at all because the managers do not care about it, or because they were not able to find teachers who could speak Irish. I now come to the question of what it is that is being really asked for. It is very important that we should answer this question very clearly and precisely. I think that the speech of the hon. Member for Waterford threw a certain ambiguity over the question as to what the demand really was. If I am to judge from the pamphlet sent to me by the Gaelic League, the demands which are made are—

"(1) That in all places where Irish is the home language pupils shall be taught to read and write Irish from their first entrance into the school, and that a knowledge of English and other useful subjects shall be imparted through the medium of Irish."

That is the point to which my right hon. friend the Member for South Aberdeen alludes. The second demand is—

"That in all places where Irish is not the home language it shall be lawful to teach Irish as a remunerated subject within school hours, and at the earliest stage at which children are capable of learning it."

Now if Irish under that Code was a remunerated subject it would become a compulsory subject, and it means that wherever the managers in either an English or an Irish-speaking district think fit Irish might be made a compulsory subject. We ought, therefore, to keep these two demands strictly apart. As regards the first demand, which asks for something which now exists in Wales, I cannot see any great harm in it; on the contrary, I think from the educational point of view we ought to grant it, for I believe it would have good results. I entirely agree with all that has been said by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen upon that point. The hon. Member for East Down gave a very misleading analogy when he said that when anyone went abroad in order to learn a foreign language he was careful to go into a country where only its own language was spoken. But a man travelling abroad for this purpose is very different from poor ignorant children going to school. So far, then, I find myself quite in agreement with the demand put forward, and I believe that it would be better for the English itself that it be taught through Irish. As I have already said, I do not think that there is anything in the rules of the Commissioners, either in the new rules or the old rules, which would preclude this from being done. In the new rules there is nothing of a positive character upon this subject, and if the Commissioners see fit to propose a rule of a more positive character assimilating the rules in Irish-speaking districts to those in Welsh-speaking districts I should not oppose it. But as far as I am concerned, I have no actual power in the matter beyond making suggestions, and I cannot promise whether they will accept my suggestions or not. I may point out that Irish is now, and will be in the future, an extra subject taught out of school hours, and I think that is a very desirable thing, and I should be very sorry to see it omitted. The hon. Member for Waterford has Spoken of a strong national feeling in favour of a revival of Irish in order that it may become the national language of Ireland.

I did not say that at all.

I thought the hon. Member's remarks tended in that direction, but if I am wrong I apologise. If it is to be suggested that Irish should be a compulsory subject, whether in Irish-speaking districts or not, as far as I can see, the result would be to re-create Irish as the national language of Ireland. That I believe to be an impossibility, and I am not prepared to encourage it. Notwithstanding the numerous resolutions of public bodies and the expression of opinion from the benches opposite, I wish to point out that there is not in any private schools a real demand for the teaching of Irish as a compulsory subject. I do not find on the part of parents who send their children to secondary schools a demand that Irish should be compulsory. In the higher colleges in Ireland is Irish a compulsory subject? I can find absolutely no trace of anything of the kind. Take the case of Queen's College, Galway. In 1897–98 there was only one student who attended the lectures on Irish; in 1898–99 nobody attended, and no one has attended this session. The fact is that there is no real, genuine, spontaneous desire in Ireland to revive Irish as the national language. I am glad of this, for it would be a retrograde step, doomed to failure. These remarks I merely make by the way, because it seems to me that the important question, after all, is whether it is desirable that the bilingual system should be applied also to Ireland. Personally I have no objection to bilingual teaching in Gaelic districts, although I foresee great difficulties in the way of providing teachers competent to instruct in the vernacular. I do not think, however, that very much time should be spent upon teaching children to write Irish, but I hold that where Irish is the home language it would be better that instruction in that language should be given.

I do not think that the speech of the right hon. Gentleman is satisfactory. Although he has declared himself in favour of the first part of our proposal, I may point out that he did not tell us of any means by which his sympathy can be carried into effect. It is idle to throw upon the managers the responsibility for not having this bilingual system of teaching put into force. The whole scheme is devised upon lines which render it impossible for school managers to get teachers who can teach that system. There is not one word in the curriculum to compel teachers to learn Irish, and no reward is offered to them for doing so. The whole question is absolutely ignored in the training colleges. What we want to know is whether the Commissioners of Education are going to encourage the teachers to learn Irish, and to impart a knowledge of Irish to such pupils as may desire to learn it. I do not want to make any attack upon the Commissioners of National Education, and I do not agree with the attacks which have been made upon them. I believe the Commissioners are being hampered by other difficulties, and the reason why they have not a better system is the fault of the Government. I know the gentleman who presides over the National Board would never have delivered the speech he did upon the question of teaching Irish if he had not the assent of his colleagues, and if he had not believed that his words might' have some effect when the rules were revised. I do not share the view that there is no strong national demand in Ireland in connection with this question. In my opinion no movement has made such pro- gress during the last ten or twelve years as the teaching of the Irish language. I remember when it was a rare thing in the city of Dublin to hear a man speaking Irish; now it is common to hear men conversing in Irish, who learned it either by their own industry or through some Gaelic association, and without having had any particular assistance from any educational source. The right hon. Gentleman also referred to the fact that no attention seemed to be given to the teaching of Irish in the colleges in Ireland. But how can Irish be taught in the colleges if you do not begin with the junior pupils in the primary schools? Surely it is not at college that the study of Irish should be commenced, and it is not likely that any number will devote themselves to Irish when no inducement of any kind is held out to them. The right hon. Gentleman throws the responsibility on the managers of schools for not having teachers who can teach in Irish in the Irish-speaking districts, but I know very well that managers would be extremely glad if they were able to get teachers who would be able to teach children through the medium of Irish. But they are restricted to teachers trained under the National Board. They have no choice. The moment a manager appoints a teacher not classed by the National Board the grant to the school ceases. The managers have not a free hand, and there is no endeavour made by the Commissioners to prepare teachers in Irish, which is the natural language of a great proportion of the people. I have been in districts in the west of Kerry where you could not find half a dozen persons who could speak English. I have seen the children in the schools, and it was positively painful to hear them reading pages of English not one word of which they understood, and then the moment they found themselves in the playground they addressed each other in Irish. These children could not explain what they were reading, and if you addressed them in English they would not understand what was said. Surely the Commissioners cannot contend that they are carrying out the trust placed in them as long as there is a large number of children in such a condition as that. I would say that the hon. Member for East Down was in himself a deplorable example of what the system of national education can do in Ireland, for there was neither sentiment, nor soul, nor nationality in his speech. He might have belonged to any nationality in the world. Education from his point of view is education that will enable a person to get on in the world, and which has neither traditions, nor memories, nor sentiment, nor soul. The hon. Member spoke of its being a disadvantage to the children to be taught anything at all of their own natural language, and, according to him, it would be better if they were transferred to a portion of the country where they could speak only English. That is not the view of persons who have studied this question, and that is not the opinion of the Chief Secretary. The right hon. Gentleman was sympathetic, and we could expect nothing more from him, so far as giving an expression of opinion, than we had from him this evening; but a more pious expression of opinion on the part of the National Board that English may be taught through the medium of Irish will have no practical result unless an effort is made to provide that that opinion is carried out. The teachers must be prepared, and there must be some inducement held out to them to learn Irish. It is not a remunerated subject now, and the teacher is supposed to be such an enthusiastic lover of the Irish language that when the work for which he is paid is done, and when his duty to the State and his pupils is discharged, he will gather the pupils around him and deliver his soul to them in Irish. The teachers must have an extraordinary amount of enthusiasm and zeal if they take up this subject after their ordinary work is done. Surely the National Board ought to be able to devise some means to reward teachers for a knowledge of Irish in districts where it is essential for carrying out their work. Then, as to the other demand, I would inform the Chief Secretary that he entirely misapprehends the position if he thinks that the Gaelic League or any hon. Member in this House has the slightest intention of displacing English and getting the people of Ireland to speak Irish only. Lunacy has not increased to that extent. What we demand is that in districts where the children hear nothing but Irish in their homes they should be taught English through the medium of Irish, and that in addition to teaching them English some effort should be made at the same time to give them a literary knowledge of the Irish language. The Chief Secretary spoke of placing schools in Ireland in the same position as schools in Wales as regards the national language. He will not do that by a mere expression of opinion, or by a mere permissive authority on the part of the National Board, that if teachers know Irish, and can teach it, the Board have no objection. We want something more. We want the books in use in the schools in Irish-speaking districts to be Irish books, just as in Wales the school books are in Welsh. The National Board know perfectly well that the note they have placed in their Code can have no effect. Teachers will not devote their time to teaching Irish after ordinary hours without pay or reward. That is not putting us in the same position as Wales. Welsh is a remunerated subject in Welsh schools, and the school-books are printed in both Welsh and English. Let the right hon. Gentleman place us in that position, and the whole of our demand will be conceded.

Frequent reference has been made in the course of this debate to Welsh experience, and perhaps, therefore, it may not be unbecoming for a Welsh Member to say a few words on this question. I would venture to say that all my hon. friends from Wales heartily concur in the reasonable and moderate request which has been put forward by the Irish Members. The Chief Secretary has, I think, exaggerated to some extent the nature of the demand that has been made. I will not enter into the question whether his assurancesare sufficiently satisfactory; that is a question for the Irish Members; but I am heartily glad to hear that the right hon. Gentleman does intend practically to apply to Ireland the system that prevails in Wales, and that should prevail in Ireland also.

All that the Irish Government can do in the matter is to suggest the change to the Commissioners, and to sanction it when it is proposed.