To ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he is aware that endeavours have been made by local authorities and others to obtain concessions of portions of the parks around London which have been refused; whether he is aware of the condition of the road along the side of Bushey Park which has been made over to the London United Tramways Company; and whether the exchange which has been effected by the Office of Works of a portion of Bushey Park against the land given by the London United Tramways Company is of equal value to that of the amount of land necessary for the London United Tramways Company to buy in order to lay down a tramway without danger to the public. (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes) The First Commissioner is not aware that concessions of portions of Royal Parks around London have been refused to local authorities when it has been established that such concessions were necessary in the public interest and for the public safety, but concessions have been refused to private individuals. The road along the side of Bushey Park is under the control of the local authority, and the First Commissioner is in no way responsible for the condition thereof. No exchange of land has been effected by the First Commissioner with the United Tramways Company; the use of the strip of land to be added to the road by setting back the park fence will be handed over to the local authority.

To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state approximately the number of acres of land in each province of India which were under cultivation in 1880 and are now lying waste. (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) I am unable to give the hon. Member the information asked for, as the agricultural statistics of the several provinces do not show the lands which were cultivated in 1880 and are now uncultivated.

To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state the number of rupees coined during the financial year 1901–02, the net profit derived therefrom, and the amount of the gold reserve fund which not long since was established in connection with the currency system of India. (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) The number of rupees coined in 1901–02, including old rupees recoined, was 495,20,460. The profit that accrued to the gold reserve fund during the year was £415,100. The gold reserve fund now consists of £3,738,000 Consols in England and £175,000 gold in India.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether, concurrently with closing the mints in British India to the free coinage of silver in 1893, the mints of all, or any, of the native states were then or subsequently closed; and, if so, will he say in which States the mints have been so closed. (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) Since 1893 the following native states in India have closed their mints and abandoned their local silver currencies in favour of the Government of India's rupee:—1894, Dewas States; 1895, certain states in Bhopowar Agency, and Western Malwa Agency; 1896, Palanpur; 1897, Bhopal and lesser neighbouring states; Kashmir; 1900, Radhanpur; Nawanagar; Jodhpur; Baroda; 1901, Jhalawar and Kota; 1902, Indore.

To ask the Secretary of State for India, with reference to the charges incurred in connection with the official Indian visitors in this country for the Coronation, whether the British Exchequer is to pay only charges in respect of the representatives of the Presidency towns and the Provinces; whether the British Exchequer will defrar any, and, if so, what charges in respect of visitors who were Indian princes or chiefs; and who will defray the expenses of the Indian military contingent, of transport of the troops to this country and back to India, and of the reception held at the India Office on 4th July respectively. (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) The Treasury has undertaken to bear the whole of the expenditure incurred in this country on account of the visit of Indian princes, delegates, and troops on the occasion of the Coronation, including the cost of the reception at the India Office; but, in accordance with the course followed in the case of Colonial visitors, all transport charges will be borne by India.

To ask the Secretary of State for India if it is due to the altered significance of the symbol £, as used during the last two years, that while in the Explanatory Memorandum of the Indian Budget for 1899–1900 the capital liabilities of the Government of India exceeded the assets by £53,029,000, in the present year the assets exceed liabilities by only £1,240,000; if not will he explain to what is the reduction due. (Answered by Secretary Lord G. Hamilton.) I understand the hon. Member to suggest that in the Explanatory Memorandum published in 1899, it was stated that the liabilities of the Government of India exceeded their assets by £53,029,000. This suggestion is erroneous. On page 25 of the Memorandum in question the balance of assets and liabilities was shown as follows: Excess of assets over liabilities in India, Rx.32,010,000; excess of liabilities over assets in England, £53,029,000. Converting the Indian figures at the rate of 15 rupees to the pound, the excess of liabilities over assets in both countries on the 31st of March, 1899, is thus £31,689,000, or.£21,340,000 less than the figures given by the hon. Member. The improvement shown in the statement for the present year is not due to the change in the form of accounts. The chief items contributing to it (besides the normal growth in the value of railway and irrigation works due to expenditure on construction beyond the amount provided by borrowing) are the acquisition of the Great Indian. Peninsula Railway by the creation of annuities, according to the system explained in the footnote to the statement, and at greater length on page 10 of the Explanatory Memorandum of July, 1901, the creation of a Gold Reserve Fund from the profits on coinage, the increase in the loans made by the Government of India from their balances to corporations and Native States, and the increase in the cash balances in India and England.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can now state, or before Clause 23 of the London Water Bill is reached he will promulgate information showing, the amount and nature of the remuneration to be assigned to each of the Commissioners by the Local Government Board. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I gave careful consideration to this matter before the Bill was introduced; but I felt then, and still feel, that it is impossible to determine the amount of the remuneration to be paid to the Commissioners until the extent of the ditties which they will be called upon to perform is ascertained. For this reason I am unable to give the information desired by my hon. friend. I have satisfied myself, however, that no undue cost will be involved.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state the approximate average, annual cost of an infantry soldier of the line, a cavalry soldier, a militia man, an Imperial yeoman, and a volunteer. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The average annual cost of a private of each of the arms mentioned is approximately as follows:—Infantry of the Line, £52 6s. 4d.; Cavalry of Line, £58 16s. 9d.; Militia (Infantry) £18 12s. 6d.; Imperial Yeomanry, £19 13s. 6d.; Volunteers, £6 0s. 0d. The cost of infantry and cavalry respectively after 1st April, 1904, when the increased pay takes effect, will be £59 6s. 1d. and £65 16s. 6d.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in the distribution of the two millions to persons other than burghers who have suffered losses because of the war, compensation will be given to those British firms who declined to remain in Johannesburg and Pretoria after the beginning of the war, to help the Boers by continuing to trade with them, and were in consequence exposed to losses by confiscation of stock-in-trade and otherwise. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain H.) The only limitation with regard to those who will be entitled to participate in the grant of £2,000,000 on proof of war losses, is that companies and large firms will be excluded, in accordance with the principle on which compensation has been awarded in Natal.

moved to include Rural District Councils specifically among the bodies which should nominate persons of experience in education to serve on the Education Committee. He said the Amendment was supported on both sides of the House. It was felt by the Rural District Councils that they were rather left out in the cold as compared with the Urban District Councils, and the noble Lord the Member for the Horncastle Division of Lincolnshire had, with himself, been requested to put this Amendment on the Paper by the Rural District Councils Association, a body which represented 200 Rural District Councils. If the hon. Baronet in charge of the Bill could not now accept the Amendment, he hoped that at any rate he would promise it favourable consideration.

declined to accept the Amendment, urging that it was better to leave the words perfectly general, so that the education authority might be at liberty to make its selection from any public or other body it might choose. If it should be thought desirable by a local authority to apply to the Rural District Council, it would be able to do so as the Bill now stood. If not, the Bill enabled the authority to have recourse to such other bodies as it judged desirable. He could not help thinking that the Amendment was an objectless Amendment, so far as extending the powers of local authorities was concerned. In addition, it was open to the objection that it inserted the name of one body, but did not enumerate the others. He hoped the Amendment would not be pressed by the hon. Baronet.

said he felt very strongly that these local Education Committees should be as representative as possible, and he objected to this Amendment because he thought it would tend to limit the discretion of the local authority. One of the most important features of this Clause was that it gave the local authority the power of appointing the best committee it could obtain. In some cases, no doubt, the representatives of Rural District Councils would be desirable, but he thought those cases would not be very common, and he was in favour of leaving to the local authority the fullest discretion.

suggested that the Amendment commanded the Council to perform an impossibility. How many Rural District Councils were there in the cities of Liverpool, Manchester, or Leeds? On the ground of number alone it would be impossible to give them all a representation on the Committee.

said that to his mind this was a most ridiculous Amendment. It was as he understood it a proposal that the Rural District Council should have the right of nominating a person to serve on the local Education Committee. The result would be that if the majority of the Education Committee were to be members of the County Council as was already provided by the Bill, and every rural district were to nominate a member of the minority, either there would be more persons with a right to sit on the committee than there would be seats available, or the County Council must undertake the invidious task of choosing between different District Councils. This would set up friction which would do, incalculable injury both to education and local government. So far they had been careful to do nothing likely to cause friction between the supreme Council of the county and the Urban and Rural District Councils. Every effort had been made to secure that they should work harmoniously. This was the first note of friction, and it seemed to him that the Government had no alternative but to offer the Amendment the strongest possible opposition. Nothing worse could happen than that it should be carried.

said the Amendment showed extraordinary inconsistency on the part of the hon. Baronet who moved it. Members of the Rural District Councils were usually men who had great difficulty in finding time to discharge their public duties, and it was preposterous that the County Council, when selecting experts to advise them in their educational work, should have to go to a body which was composed of neither educational experts nor leisured men, and the members of which would in consequence of the difficulty of having to go to the county town to attend meetings, abstain from putting in an appearance. He strongly opposed the Amendment.

said he was much struck by the sudden cessation of talk on the part of the Opposition, after the Amendment had been moved. There must be surely something very remarkable in this unexpected silence. He felt sure the Opposition would not have been so anxious to divide so early had this Amendment been submitted from the Government side of the House. He did not in the least undervalue the work of Rural Councils, but it could not be said that the members of those bodies had much experience in educational work. The Clause, as it stood, gave ample power to the County Councils to select

pointed out that if Rural District Councils were given the right to nominate representatives on the Education Committee an equally good claim might be advanced on behalf of the Urban District Councils and small boroughs, and if the rights of both kinds of bodies were conceded, the Education Committee would be filled by their representatives to the entire exclusion of other representatives of educational bodies who would be specially fitted to advise the County Councils in this important work entrusted to them. Therefore, while recognising the reasons for the Amendment, he was unable to vote for it.

moved to leave out "other bodies" and insert "educational institutions in or near the district not themselves subject to the control of the local education authority, such as universities, colleges of university rank, non-local schools, and local endowed schools." He said it would be observed that this Amendment dealt with the question of the representation of educational bodies in no sectarian or sectional spirit. If they were to have nominations from any bodies at all it was desirable to restrict them to such bodies as proceeded on broad national lines. He wished to point out that there were other bodies, such as trade unions and co-operative societies, which he had no desire to exclude. He wanted, in fact, to bring in bodies which sought to promote, the general welfare of the whole body politic. He regretted that they had not on the previous day an opportunity of arriving at some compromise as to the form of nomination. What he was contending for in his Amendment was that the bodies which should contribute to the membership of the local committee should be bodies of an educational character as distinct from sectional or sectarian interests, and the Amendment was pressed upon him by those who were interested in higher education in Birmingham and the Midlands generally. The Government had intimated that the Board of Education would carefully weigh the claims of strictly sectarian bodies, and press those claims upon the County Councils. Now, one of the main objects of the Bill, as he understood it, was that it was to be a really educational measure, bringing all branches of education together; but the Board of Education, by pressing the claims of purely sectarian bodies on the County Councils, would be importing into the new educational machinery the very evil of sectarian strife and animosity which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, while in office, again and again protested against—the evil which resulted from the popular election of School Boards under the cumulative vote.

said he imagined no one would object to the enumeration of the bodies which the hon. Member desired to see represented on the Education Committee. But he did not see on what principle of justice the hon. Gentleman desired to exclude any other institution, such as the Association of Voluntary Schools, from representation, They were going, rightly or wrongly, to place the denominational schools under the control of the education authority, and to insist that upon every board of management of the voluntary schools there should be a representative of the local education authority. Was it not common fairness that they should have, not a preponderating representation, nor even a numerically important representation, but at all events someone on the Education Committee through whom they might make their views heard? Although that was a perfectly sound view as regarded all denominational schools, probably it was of less real importance when they were dealing with Anglican schools, or even Wesleyan schools, than it was when they were dealing with Roman Catholic schools. There ought to be some one on the Education Committee to represent Roman Catholic schools in regard to any action the committee might take which specially affected those schools. To try to prevent that simple measure of fairness from being carried out by using such phrases as "sectarian" and "anti-national" was not very wise. He believed the Committee, except for the purpose of sectarian controversy, did not really desire such an exclusion, and he trusted the Amendment would be rejected.

thought a strong case existed for the Amendment. The right hon. Gentleman had not given any reason why these sectarian associations should be represented on the Education Committee. No difficulty would arise in regard to the Roman Catholic schools, because, with sonic exceptions, those schools were only used by members of their own denomination. He could not conceive that anybody wanted to injure them or to deal unjustly by them. Yet their case was always trotted out in the front rank of the schools as to which difficulty was likely to arise. He protested against the use that was made of the Roman Catholic case.

said he thought that the case was strongest in regard to the Roman Catholic schools; but there was a case with regard to the other schools.

said by Clause 8 they had subjected the denominational schools to the control of the local authority for all the purposes of secular instruction. Therefore, so far as secular instruction was concerned, the denominational schools were on a level with other schools. For the purposes of religious instruction the denominational schools were absolutely under the control of their own managers. No question could come before the Education. Committee which involved religious instruction, and, therefore, so far as he could see, the raison d'être for the representation of these bodies on the committee entirely disappeared. The object of the Government was to give them a double control.

No.

said their managers were to have complete and absolute control over religious instruction, and yet religious instruction was the reason for giving them representation on the committee. It was an illustration of a familiar proverb—they wanted both to eat their cake and have it. He entirely failed to see the ground or justice of the right hon. Gentleman's demand. If the local education authority had been given any power to interfere with religious instruction, this claim to representation would have been well founded. But there was no such power, and the claim, therefore, fell to the ground. He saw no reason why any sectarian association should be given representation on the committee. Nothing could be worse for the good working of the committee than that certain persons should be put on it to be the champions of sectarianism. That would introduce into this new body an element of discord which need not be there at all, and it was a very bad omen for the working of the committee, for there could be nothing more likely to introduce the party element and the germ of discord than the adoption of such a policy.

The Committee will allow me to say one word in reply to what has fallen from the right hon. Gentleman. He talks in the first place as if the allowing of a single representative of a Roman Catholic Voluntary School Association in the district to be on the committee is to give them a controlling voice, or something like a controlling voice. [An HON. MEMBER: No.] At all events an important voice in the management of the schools of the district. That I understood to be the right hon. Gentleman's argument. But it should be remembered that in respect of these very Roman Catholic schools you have put, not one out of forty-five or fifty, but two out of six, who are to represent the local education authority on the board of managers. If that is not interference with sectarian education, surely he might allow the whole body of Roman Catholic schools in a district to send one representative to the Education Committee in case something should arise which specially affects their interests. Other questions than religious education would be of interest to the denominational managers. The very preservation of these schools is not a question of religious teaching, but it is a question of the greatest interest of the denomination, and surely they might be allowed to make their voices heard if any policy is initiated which would have a destructive effect.

But the Education Committee will have no policy. It will be the policy of the County Council.

Surely they might be allowed to explain or, at all events, to make their voice heard in the committee which is to advise the Council in these matters. But that is not all, although I think that would be enough. I think the fact that this Education Committee is to advise not only upon broad policy but upon other matters is a sufficient reason for giving these schools some way of making their voices heard. But there is more than that. Let the Committee remember what the right hon. Gentleman has asked. It is that the education authority shall have the right to veto the appointment of a teacher. The Education Committee have to advise on that point. Is it not fair and commonsense that at all events before so drastic a policy is pursued the voluntary schools concerned should have some methods of explaining their views? I do really think that if hon. Members would approach this question in a more impartial spirit than the right hon. Gentleman has done, they would not attempt to force on the House or into the Bill provisions which would be inequitable in working.

said he did not think the Prime Minister had quite fairly stated the objection of his right hon. friend the Member for South Aberdeen. His right hon. friend had never objected to allowing a Roman Catholic to sit on the committee.

I did not understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that I had done so. If he had said so I should have contradicted him. I have not the slightest objection to Roman Catholics being on the committee. I think it might be a courteous thing to invite persons of all denominations. My objection is to their being on the committee in the capacity of Roman Catholics.

said he understood that his right hon. friend objected to a Roman Catholic or anyone else being forced on a body of that character merely because of his faith.

To represent the schools.

But after all it was a theological test, and no such test should either qualify or disqualify for membership of the committee. Let no man sit in this governing body with regard to his religious faith or sect. If the Government were anxious that Roman Catholics should have a voice in the management, not merely of their own schools, but of the educational system of the country, why did they abolish the School Board? There were districts in which Roman Catholics were in a small minority, but one belonging to their religion got on to the School Board. Was not that a better system than the system now proposed? It was idle for the Prime Minister to curry favour with Catholics by proposing to allow them to become members of the committee. By the system which the opponents of this Bill wished to retain, Roman Catholics were allowed to represent their educational interests on almost every School Board throughout the country. It was assumed, because a body was more or less in the hands of Nonconformists, that therefore Anglicans and Roman Catholics were necessarily excluded from a voice in its affairs. That was perfectly absurd. The governing bodies in Wales did not exclude Roman Catholics. If a Catholic was willing to work for the general interest of the community they selected him without regard to his creed. In the county of Merioneth, which was as Nonconformist as any in Wales, they a short time ago selected a Roman Catholic for a teachership because he was a better man than the Nonconformist candidates. It was Idle to talk as if there was a dead set against Roman Catholics because of their faith.

said that in his county there never had been any religious difficulty at all, and that was not because the members of the governing body did not hold strong opinions one way or another, but simply because they were willing to work in the general interest of education. Of course they were aided by the fact that under the Welsh Act there was complete exclusion of sectarian influences. The non-sectarian character of the bodies contributed to their harmonious working, and he sincerely trusted that nothing would be done by future legislation which would infringe that principle.

said it seemed to him that the real difficulty about the Clause, as it stood, was that it would be possible for sectarian bodies to nominate persons to the Education Committee who would be firebrands, and who might do a great deal of mischief. He noticed that the Prime Minister was making more and more use of the Roman Catholic case. It was a separate case, but he fully admitted, with the Prime Minister, that it could not be treated separately. He only wished that it could be treated separately. But that case should not prejudice the wider case. If these denominational representatives were put on the Education Committee, what became of the complete control of secular education by the local authority. The parents of the children attending the elementary schools elected the local Councils. While the question of religious instruction was excluded from the purview of the Education Committee, was it necessary to have these elementary schools specially represented on the Education Committee? He fully agreed with his hon. friend who moved the Amendment that the bodies he named were those most suitable to nominate their own representatives. He did not himself see that it was necessary to have special representatives of the elementary schools, although he admitted that in many cases it would be very wise if men of that kind were on the committee. But surely they were covered by the words "persons of experience in education." On the other hand, they did want experts such as would be appointed by the bodies named by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire.

said that he thought the Clause should be modified in some direction. He had no objection at all to the County Councils voluntarily giving the right of nomination to other bodies which were interested in education, but that was a different matter from allowing a Government Department to force on the County Council the right of nomination in favour of another body against the will of the local authority. It seemed to him that the words of the Clause put it in the power of the Board of Education to force on the County Council the acceptance of a scheme which would give the right of nomination to a body to which the County Council distinctly objected. He viewed with great apprehension the friction and opposition which was sure to arise between the Education Department which had decided views and a County Council which entertained equally decided views in an opposite direction. He thought it would be most unfortunate if there was a struggle between them, and that controversies on such delicate questions should arise. The position of the County Councils would be very uncomfortable, and even intolerable; and for these reasons he should like to see some modification introduced, if not now, at a future stage—some such limiting words as "where it appears desirable," so as to give the County Council the option to say whether these other bodies should have the right of nomination or not.

said he had an Amendment lower down on the Paper which substantially raised the same points involved in the discussion of the Amendment of his hon. friend, and he asked the permission of the Committee to make a few general observations on the subject. They had heard a great deal from the Prime Minister and the Attorney General the previous day and that morning, about the wishes and the position of the local authorities, the County Councils in particular. It occurred to him that it was a curious thing that the natural course had not been adopted by the Government of trying to find out from the municipalities, and the County Councils themselves what they wanted, for surely they were the best judges in this matter. The representative Municipal Associations, and the Association of County Councils had given no approval whatever to bringing in representatives of bodies unless these were educational bodies. The words of the Clause were carefully considered by both these Associations when the Bill was first printed, and when there was a desire to place the most favourable construction upon the words, some of which seemed to be rather vague, and they drew up a resolution in regard to the matter. The deputation which waited on the Duke of Devonshire was specifically of opinion that a majority of the Education Committee should be appointed from their own number. He was sure that if these mysterious words in the Clause had been explained in the manner given by the Attorney General, it would have brought down the condemnation of these important bodies. However Conservative a body the County Councils Association might be, there was a division of opinion amongst the members that did not correspond with party. It was a division between the lay and the clerical mind which was far more serious than party distinction. He believed that the County Councils Association and the Municipal Association would resent having forced on them gentlemen, however eminent, respectable, and personally popular, who were sent to "roll the log" of some particular religious denomination. The Prime Minister had used an argument with the spirit of which he entirely sympathised, but he could not agree with the conclusion which the right hon. Gentleman drew from it. He said how hard it would be if a Roman Catholic or Church of England teacher were dismissed by the interference of the managers, or the County Council itself, and there was nobody to speak for the teacher, or as it were to hold a brief on the Committee to defend the cause of the denomination. Now, he contended that cases of that kind ought to be judged impartially, and the incriminated party ought himself to be heard. He could hardly imagine anything more objectionable than that when a case of a Roman Catholic, or Church of England, or Wesleyan school came up, there should be sonic gentleman at the table whose bounden duty would be to get up on the Committee and argue in behalf of his particular client. That was his answer to the Prime Minister. He regretted that the hon. Member for North West Ham was not now in his place, because he had told the Committee the previous day that what he desired was a system of representation which he found last year on a visit to Zurich in Switzerland. The hon. Member for North West Ham had told the Committee that his ideal was that the nominations should come from great educational bodies, as was the ease in Zurich. That was what was proposed in the Amendment, which might be called the Zurich Amendment. Let it not be said again that the Opposition were opposed to co-optation. What they were opposed to was nomination by sectarian and denominational bodies. They knew the machinery of co-optation and were strong partisans of it. He knew gentlemen who had been originally opposed to co-optation, but who had been converted to it by the admirable manner in which men, chosen by co-optation, did their work. He wanted to ask the Prime Minister whether the meaning of these two sub-Sections, taken together, was that the committees should consist entirely of representatives of the County Council, and those persons nominated by the representative bodies, or whether the scheme also provided for co-option. Suppose the committee consisted of twenty members, and that the County Council only appointed one, were the remaining nineteen to be all id the class described in sub-Section (b); or was it to be in the power of the County Councils to appoint four or five representatives from public bodies, and the others by co-optation?

The second alternative is the right one.

said that that should be made clear in the Clause, because it was not clear now. He hoped that before the Report stage of the Bill was reached, the Government would carefully consider the views of the great municipal bodies and County Councils who, he was sure, did not wish sectarian and denominational interests thrust into their midst. They ought to be free from the unfortunate animosity that had done so much to injure the cause of education in the past.

said he quite agreed that the kind of bodies the hon. Member indicated in his Amendment were bodies which might naturally have the power under the scheme of appointing members of the Education Committee, but these were not all the bodies which ought to have a right to that privilege. As an hon. Member who had had practical experience upon this point, he should like to state what took place in regard to the London County Council and its Education Committee. The London County Council was not obliged to admit anybody but members of its own body, but they adopted a very much wiser course, and while maintaining that a majority of the committee should be members of the Council they admitted an almost equal number of other people. Amongst the bodies represented on the London County Council Education Committee were the London Trades Council, the London School Board, the Association of Headmasters, the National Union of Teachers, the City of London Guilds Institute, and the City Parochial Trustees who were concerned with the London Polytechnics. In addition to these there were two or three members appointed by co-optation. University College and King's College were also represented. The circumstances of different districts differed enormously, and it was useless to prescribe that what was suitable for London would lie suitable for a remote district of Devonshire, and some latitude must be given to the local authority and the Board of Education as to what sort of people should be co-opted. The more freedom of choice they gave the better, because different circumstances required different treatment, and in this way they were more likely to get suitable people. With regard to this sectarian question he did not know that it should have been raised at all. There might be districts in which the diocesan associations should have a nomination, but there were districts where this would not be advisable. He did not recognise that any particular denomination or association had ally claim, except under very special circumstances, to nominate a member of the Education Committee. They ought to trust their officials to behave like reasonable and sensible people, and to do their best to find in each particular district the representatives who would be of the greatest service.

said they had not all got the same child-like faith as to the manner in which this Act would be administered as the hon. Member. Religious difficulties had caused much sectarian strife in the past. This Clause appeared to him at the outset a very curious Clause to construe, and still more difficult to enforce. He understood it could be enforced by mandamus. The new construction put upon the Clause by the explanations of the Prime Minister had produced a very dark outlook. Take the county of Lincoln. The Prime Minister said it would not be merely permissive but obligatory on the County Councils to appoint even a representative of the Roman Catholic Voluntary Association in the county of Lincoln. If that were correct, it was a very unjust condition.

But it does not do that.

said he understood now that there was no obligation of this kind on the County Councils to appoint representatives of voluntary associations, and it was permissive.

That is so.

said there were in the county of Lincoln not more than twenty Roman Catholic schools in the villages, and not more than forty or fifty Wesleyan schools, while there were 350 Anglican schools. Surely the Anglican and the Wesleyan schools would not wish to have representation except through the favour of the elected representatives. Surely the Anglican schools had sufficient protection by the preponderance of the representation on the managers board and the influence they exercised over the County Council. Why should they recognise the voluntary associates and diocesan conferences which in his county were remarkable only for the line of cleavage between the views of the laymen and the clergy, especially on educational questions. It was impossible to take up any report of a diocesan conference or congress in his county without seeing that they were constantly at loggerheads, particularly in regard to the administration of the Elementary Education Act. This exception was not wanted by the great Nonconformist Church of this country, who did not ask for it, and though there might have been some compact made between the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church to secure this exception, he ventured to say that this was a phase of the question which had not been disclosed to Parliament, and it had not dawned upon the electors of the country, and certainly not upon the educationists in the rural districts, to whom this Clause would prove to be a very objectionable one.

in a maiden speech, said he wished to touch upon one or two points in the Amendment. He thought there were other bodies who ought to assist in the work of the committee. If Government would allow the present conditions to remain unaltered, and gave the County Council the entire right to call in whom they liked, he would favour allowing the Clause to stand as at present. It was because the Government refused to allow the present municipalities and County Councils to have the powers they now possessed that he rose to object to the position they took up. If it was desired to include the special bodies mentioned in the Amendment, he would move a further Amendment that trades unions, and co-operative associations should also be included. He desired to give one or two reasons for holding that those two organisations should be so included. Take the case of trades unions. He was connected with one that gave ten free scholarships for certain branches of technical instruction, and was closely connected with another that gave every year thirty free scholarships, and a prize of 5s. to everyone that passed certain examinations. He was also connected with a co-operative society which gave a free scholarship to the children of its members who took advantage of the opportunities offered by the Technical Instruction Committee. He contended that those bodies had certain claims, but he did not trust the Government with respect to them. The reason was because he had in his hand a few words which were used by an official of the Government who had charge over a certain Department. That official said: "I must decline to recognise the union as intermediary or to receive a deputation which may purport to convey the views of its members." When a Government permitted any official to use words like that in connection with their trades union he was not prepared to trust them in that matter. He asked that the Government would permit the powers referred to to be given to the local authorities as at present, and said then be would support any resolution which distinctly stated what societies were to be brought into that Clause.

said he did not believe that in one case out of ten would any serious difference arise between the County Council and the Education Department upon the point suggested by the hon. Member for East Somerset. With regard to what had fallen from the lion. Gentleman who last spoke, he t bought there were cases where the trades councils ought to be represented on the educational body. In his own constituency he thought it would be right that there should be some trade union representation. All he said was that the demand for representation by all these bodies on the Educational Committees could only be justified on grounds of educational interest. He utterly denied that because a body is denominational it might not also be educational. The denominational associations were working, and did their part, and took their place in the great work of national education. He supported the proposal on the converse ground that if they did not give this representation they would exclude the energy and zeal of large bodies of men, and estrange them from this great work. The School Board had, as a fact, through the cumulative vote, brought to education the sympathies of large bodies of men who worked harmoniously together, and if in the future the right of minorities to take their part in the system of the education of this country, which they had in the past, was denied, it would estrange some very valuable elements which our national system could ill afford to part with.

said he thought the sound thing to do in this case was to allow the County Councils themselves, as part of

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause to the word "acts," inclusive, in page 4, line 39, stand part of the Clause,' be now put."