To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can state the total amount of grants made since 1843 for schoolmasters' houses; and whether he will consider the expediency of providing, at some future stage of the Education Bill, for the recognition of the claim of the public to the use of such houses jointly with their use by the trustees of the school. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I cannot give the figures asked for by the hon. Member; but I am having them prepared with all speed. The second part of the Question is under consideration

To ask the Postmaster General how often during the past year has the mail steamer "Glencoe" delivered the mails at 4 p.m. at Port Ellen, Islay, and how often have the road mails from Portaskaig been delivered at Port Ellen at 7·55, the schedule times; whether the steamer or the road mail is the cause of the detention, and have any or either incurred any penalty; and, if so, has such penalty been imposed. (Answered Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The schedule time of arrival of the mails at Port Ellen is 4·25 p.m. when conveyed to that port by direct steamer (and not 4 p.m. as stated in the Question). When conveyed by steamer to Portaskaig and thence by road to Port Ellen the mails are due at 8·25 p.m. (and not 7·55 p.m. as stated in the Question). From the 1st of January to the 31st of October last the direct steamer arrived at Port Ellen on seventy-two occasions at or before the scheduled time, and on 101 occasions after that hour; but the average lateness for the 173 clays has not amounted to a punter of an hour. During the last four months, comprising the season in which the mails and traffic are heavier than at any other time of the year, the mails sent via Portaskaig have reached Port Ellen at or before the scheduled time on four occasions. On the other thirty occasions there has been some delay, owing in great part to irregularity in the working of the train service to Gourock; and the delays in the steamer service have not been sufficient to call for the imposition of a penalty. The road service between Portaskaig and Port Ellen has been well performed, but it has lately been necessary to allow additional time for the journey on account of the detour which has to be made through the closing of a bridge, which had been damaged by floods.

To ask the Postmaster General, whether seeing that in 1880 a scale of pay was introduced in London giving to telegraph operators the salary of £per year, and that late Controller Sir H. Fischer, stated that seniority, good conduct, and manipulative ability secured this salary to operating telegraphists, he will state what qualifications are necessary to secure this salary at the present time (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The qualifications are ability, good conduct, length of service, and fitness for the work of supervision; and the Postmaster General selects for promotion from among the candidates so qualified the officer who is in his opinion, all things considered, best fitted for the duties which have to be performed.

To ask the Postmaster General, whether the rate per word for cable messages between England and Australasia viâ the Pacific has yet been fixed; and, if so, whether he has any objection to giving the information. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I am informed by the Pacific Cable Board that they have fixed the rate per word between England and Australasia at 3s.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education with reference to the appointment of Mr. Barnett, one of the inspectors of the Board, in Natal, whether he will state the, name of his successor and state what experience he has had in educational work, and in particular whether he has had any experience in public elementary schools before being sent to inspect them. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) Mr. Henry Maunsell Richards, M.A., has been appointed a temporary Inspector in place of Mr. Barnett. Mr. Richards holds the elementary school teachers' certificate of the Board of Education, and taught in elementary schools from 1895–7. He was subsequently for four years head master of the Middlesex County high School, Isleworth, and became a junior inspector under the Board of Education in September, 1901.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the word "school," in Clause 15 (a) of the Education Bill, includes a public elementary school. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) Yes, Sir.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if he will say whether, in the event of the Education Bill now before Parliament becoming law, the managers of voluntary schools will be allowed to appropriate for their own purposes, that is, to the upkeep of the school buildings, etc., any credit balances they may have in hand at the time of the adoption of the Act. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) Understanding by "their own purposes" the purposes for which the managers have to make provision in the Bill, the answer is in the affirmative.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if he will state, in the event of the Education Bill now before Parliament becoming law, what will be the position of a member of the Council of a county borough, or other authority charged with the administration of the Act, who, previous to the passing of the Act, had undertaken contracts with the School Board within the same area, and which contracts are not completed at the time of the passing of the Act, and will such a contractor invalidate his scat on the Council. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) Persons "concerned in any bargain or contract" with a District Council are (subject to certain exceptions) disqualified from being members of the Council by Section 40 (e) of The Local Government Act, 1894. Persons having "directly or indirectly…any share or interest in any contract" with a County or Borough Council, are (subject to certain exceptions) disqualified from membership of the Council by Section 12 (1) (c) of The Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, and Sections 2 and 75 of The Local Government Act, 1888. Contracts entered into with School Boards will be taken over by the new authorities, and will carry with them the disqualification for membership of those authorities.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that the Return, Navy (Ships' Boilers); No. 350, dated 17th October. 1902, does not include the cost of any alterations or additions made since commissioning, he will state the expenses incurred for alterations or additions with regard to the ships mentioned in the Return. (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) There is no objection to giving the additional information now asked for, but as a large number of ships are involved it would probably be more convenient to give it in the form of a Return if the noble Lord will move for one

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that objections are entertained by operatives in the industry of file-cutting by hand, as well as by the Cutlers' Company, to some of the proposed new regulations under Section 79 of the Factory and Workshops Act of 1901; and whether lie will take care that the new rules are not put into force until a local inquiry has been held into the objections taken to them. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) When I issued these regulations in draft I invited criticisms on the proposals contained in them, and I have received objections to some of them both from operatives in Sheffield and from the Cutlers' Company. A local inquiry will be held, at which all persons affected by the proposed regulations will be heard, before they are finally settled and put into force.

To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state the names of the members of the Committee now inquiring into the Consular Service, and why the distribution of the Service is not included in the terms of reference. (Answered by Lord Cranborne.) I have already stated to the House that the inquiry is a Departmental inquiry, and that, according to the practice in such cases, it would certainly be impossible to promise the publication of the Report until the Secretary of State shall have had an opportunity of considering it. The question of giving the terms of the reference upon which the Report will be founded seems naturally to depend upon what is ultimately decided in regard to the publication of the Report. The last Question I answered on the 10th instant.†

To ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland

† See page 453.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the evening of 18th October, while the Tullyvallen National Flute Band were playing along the road near Silverbridge, County Armagh, one Robert Coulter came out of his house and fired four shots from a revolver at them while two constables from Cullyhanna were then present; and whether he will take steps to prosecute this man. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) A prosecution has been ordered in this case.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether officers who have joined the Army during the War, and have served in South Africa up to the present time and are now returning home, can be provided with furnished quarters on the same terms as those joining the Army on or after 1st December, 1902. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The officers referred to will be granted furniture on the same terms as those joining on or after 1st December.

To ask the Secretary of State for War what steps do the Government mean to take with regard to prisoners of war who were British subjects some time previous to the declaration of war in South Africa; whether some of the above, who are clerks in the commandants' offices, are to be allowed to go back to South Africa; are exceptions to be made, or will all such prisoners of war be permitted to return; do the Government intend to recognise as burghers all prisoners of war whose papers were signed before the declaration of war; and when do the Government propose releasing all prisoners of war, or taking steps to secure their discharge from custody. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) Prisoners of war who were British subjects previous to the outbreak of the war are not in the position of burghers of the late Republics, and are therefore not entitled to be sent back to South Africa tinder the terms of surrender. His Majesty's Government cannot recognise any naturalisation on or after 29th September, 1899, on which date the Volksraad of the South African Republic passed a resolution referring to the war which, it was stated, threatened to break out between the Republic and Great Britain, and promising burghership to all who assisted the Republic. It is hoped that the return of all prisoners of war who came within the terms of surrender will be complete early next year.

To ask the Secretary of State for War can he state the number of effective non-commissioned officers and men of over three months service in the 1st and 2nd Army Corps respectively, giving the numbers of regulars, militia, and efficient volunteers. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The detailed figures required can only be obtained by calling for Returns from each unit concerned. Every effort is now being made to cut down Returns, and the hon. Member will doubtless agree as to the undesirability of calling for the figures.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, considering the fact that a number of old volunteers, many of them the best shots in their battalions, cannot comply with the new regulations respecting attendance at camp, he will consider the advisability of making some concession to men who have served for a period, say, of ten or fifteen years, allowing attendance at camp in their case to be optional. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) If the hon. Member will kindly refer to Army Order 119 of 1902 lie will find that the regulations therein set forth apply to these cases. The selection of the officers and volunteers to be exempted from attendance at camp rests with the commanding officer. It is not held practicable to make length of service, apart from other conditions, a definite qualification for exemption in the manner suggested by the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Mountain Artillery is a senior service to the Garrison Artillery, though a branch of it, and if officers are recommended for promotion to the former from the Royal Garrison Artillery; whether, seeing that officers of Horse Artillery receive higher rates of pay than those of Field Artillery, he will say why officers of the Mountain Artillery, though they have the care of mules and horses as well as of guns, and their cost of living is higher, receive lower pay than the officers of Garrison Artillery. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick) The Mountain Division of the Royal Garrison Artillery is not viewed as senior to the rest, but officers are, in each rank, selected from garrison companies for appointment to the mountain batteries. As regards the pay, the officers of the Mountain Artillery have no armament under their charge, and therefore are not qualified for the special pay peculiar to the garrison companies.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any information to the effect that the Government of the British Colony of Newfoundland is proposing to enter into a treaty with the United States of America, by which the Colony binds itself not to accord any preferential trading facilities to goods from the Mother Country or other portions of the British Empire; and, if so, whether the Imperial Government will withhold its consent from such a provision. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) The Convention which has been signed does not contain any general stipulation of the nature set forth in the question. Article IV. gives a list of articles which, while the Convention is in force, are to be admitted into Newfoundland free of duty, and a further list of articles upon which the rate of duty is not to exceed a specified amount, while Article V. provides that "if any reduction is made by the Colony of Newfoundland at any time during the term of the Convention, in the rate of duty upon the articles named in Article IV. of this Convention, the said reduction of duty shall apply to the United States." The articles specified are flour, pork, bacon, hams and tongues, smoked beef and sausages, beef, pigs' heads, hocks and feet (salted and cured), Indian meal, peas, oatmeal, rice, kerosine oil.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether representations have been made to him respecting the working of the Local Government Act in County Monaghan; and whether he will institute inquiry into the circumstances with a view to the re-arrangement of the electoral ons (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Any representations made to the Local Government Board on the subject will be dealt with in the manner provided by Article 25 of the Schedule to The Local Government, (Application of Enactments) Order 1898.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware of the increasing prevalence of consumption in Ireland; and if he will direct the Local Government Board to point out to the local authorities the importance of providing in each county a properly equipped sanatorium for the treatment of such cases. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The reply to the first inquiry is in the affirmative. The matter has engaged the most careful consideration of the Local Government Board, who have repeatedly directed the attention of sanitary authorities to the best means of preventing the further spread of this disease. In their Circular Letter of 16th September, 1901, the Board strongly urged upon boards of guardians the advisability of either making special arrangements with the managers of existing sanatoria for consumptives, or themselves erecting such sanatoria for the curative treatment of this disease. The Board have recently called upon their medical inspectors to furnish Reports as to the action taken in each district.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state why the Local Government Board for Ireland reduced the salary of the medical officer of the Emyvale (County Monaghan) Dispensary below the sum arranged by the local authority. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Board of Guardians proposed to fix the salary at £160 a year. Having regard, however, to the salaries paid to medical officers of other dispensary districts in the union, and to the general circumstances of the several districts, the Local Government Board considered that the salary should be fixed at £145.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the New Zealand coal being supplied for the use of the China Squadron is similar to that given in the Table of Analysis on page 351 of the New Zealand Official Year Book for 1901, as produced at Coalbrookdale or to that produced at Westport.

The coal supplied to the China Squadron is that produced at Granite Creek, about twenty miles from Westport. Coalbrookdale coal is produced at the Dormiston mines, also near Westport. A cargo of the latter coal is about to be tried on the China Station.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has any information to the effect that on 5th September the Amir of Afghanistan read in Durbar a direct communication from the Russian Government, or to the effect that the Governor of Afghan-Turkestan has received from the Governor of the adjoining part of Russian-Turkestan a message as to direct commercial relations across the Amu-Dania.

I have no information as to these alleged communications.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been directed to the number of cases awaiting hearing on the original and appellate sides of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in the Presidency of Bengal, and to the fact that the administration of criminal appeals is such that persons on short terms of imprisonment who have not been released on bail will probably serve their term before their appeals are heard, he can make arrange merits to expedite the administration of justice in that Presidency.

In April last I sanctioned the strengthening of the original side of the High Court at Calcutta by the appointment of an additional Judge with the necessary establishment in order to cope with the arrears of business on that side, and at the same time made suggestions for distributing the business of the Court so as to expedite its disposal on the appellate side. I am not aware that there is any such complaint as is indicated in the Question as to criminal appeals, to which precedence is always given over other business, but I will make enquiries. I may remind the hon. Member that for the last two and a half months the Court has been closed for the vacation.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that letters from China now arrive by the overland route in this country in twenty-six days, as against forty-four days by the mail steamships; and whether he will take this fact into consideration when revising the mail contracts.

I believe it to be the fact that letters can be sent from Chifu to London in twenty-six days. The possibilities of the Trans-Siberian route will not be overlooked in settling the mail service of the future.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he will state when the P. and O. and Orient mail steamship contracts for the conveyance of mails to India, China, and Australia will terminate; when will new tenders be invited; and what steps are being taken to meet the difficulties now presenting themselves in regard to the employment of coloured labour on the mail steamships to Australia.

; These contracts are terminable on or after 31st January, 1905, by two years previous notice. I cannot at present fix a date for calling for new tenders. Any questions that arise in regard to them will have to be discussed by the different Governments concerned.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether in view of the fact that halfpenny circulars are re-directed free of charge by post while telegraphic messages cannot be so re-directed, he will give directions for the re-direction of telegrams free of charge by post.

My hon. friend is probably aware that his suggestion has been considered by previous Postmasters General, who have not seen their way to adopt it. I will, however, look into the matter again.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether, in the interests of the public and the staff, he will consider the advisability of enforcing the retirement of telegraph officials at the age of sixty years; and whether he will grant a Return showing the number of men retained after that age in the Telegraph Department, with the reasons that made an extension of time necessary.

I do not consider it advisable to alter the present practice regarding the retirement of telegraph (or other) officials at the age of sixty years. The rule at present is that all pensionable officers, of whatever grade, whose conduct, capacity and efficiency fall below a fair standard, shall be called upon to retire at sixty; but retirement at sixty is not enforced in the case of officers whose conduct is good and who are certified by their superior officers as thoroughly efficent. On this explanation perhaps the hon. Member will consider a Return such as he asks for unnecessary.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he can state how many officials from English and Scotch post offices have been appointed as post office officials in Welsh-speaking districts in Wales since 1st January last; and how many English and Scotch officials have been appointed to Irish post offices during the same period.

Seventeen officers from English and Scotch post offices have been appointed to offices in Welsh-speaking districts in Wales since the 1st of January last and seventeen officers from English and Scotch post offices have, during the same period, been appointed to Irish post offices. I am not able to state the nationality of these officers.

Will the right hon. Gentleman insist on them having a knowledge of the Irish language?

have already said I cannot do that.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Sir Horace Rumbold, lately His Majesty's Ambassador at Vienna, and now in receipt of a pension out of public moneys, had the sanction of His Majesty's Government in publishing a volume of reminiscences containing private conversations and other matters relating to countries to which he was accredited.

No application was made by Sir Horace Rumbold for the sanction of His Majesty's Government. But in cases where the reminiscences are not of recent date, and are confined to personal incidents and matters of public notoriety, such sanction has not apparently been considered essential. Any such publication by a former representative of this country without the leave of the Secretary of State, would, if it related to recent events which have come under the writer's notice in the course of his official duties, be most reprehensible, and His Majesty's Government are considering whether it will not be advisable to take steps in order to leave no room for doubt as to the manner in which they regard the subject.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state the conditions on which land is granted to intending settlers in the Protectorates of British East Africa and Uganda; whether any land is granted freehold; what is the maximum period for which leases are granted; and whether he has any official communications on these points from the Chief Commissioners of those Protectorates.

I shall be happy to give the hon. Gentleman a copy of the East African Crown Lands Ordinance, 1902, which will give him a great deal of the information he requires. The corresponding Ordinance for Uganda has not yet been enacted.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the train which left Kyle at 11.25 a.m., on 30th July last, was delayed through a breakdown or collision at Larbert; and will he state whether a Board of Trade inquiry has been held in regard to the cause of the accident; and, if so, with what result.

The accident in question was duly notified to the Board of Trade, and upon consideration of the information supplied, the Board were advised that the case was not one in which it was necessary to order an official inquiry.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the conditions and restrictions placed upon the erection of cottages by the District Councils render it practically impossible to build them; and will he state by what rules the Local Government Board are guided in approving the. bye-laws proposed by these Councils.

My right hon. friend has asked me to answer the question in his absence. I am not aware that the building of cottages has become a practical impossibility owing to the conditions and restrictions imposed by District Councils, but my attention has been drawn to some cases where difficulty has been experienced on account of the requirements of the building bye-laws in force. In approving bye-laws with respect to new buildings, the Local Government Board are chiefly concerned to see that they are such as the local authority may legally make, and are sufficient to secure proper conditions, especially as regards stability and sanitation. I am not in a position to state what bye-laws are needed in particular districts. The responsibility rests with the District Conned in each instance of determining what bye-laws they will propose. Notice is given in the district by advertisements before bye-laws are confirmed, and any objections made to me with regard to them would have my careful consideration. I may add that I have recently issued a mo, titled code of model bye-laws for use in rural districts which are specially suited for these districts, and from which are omitted certain requirements usually in force in urban districts.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that since the opening of the Buncrana and Carndonagh Railway, after providing for working expenses, there has been a surplus profit in each half year, and that prior to the opening of the line the guaranteeing area had to provide certain sums for dividends on the £5,000 baronial guaranteed shares; and, seeing that, notwithstanding Section 5 of The Tramways (Ireland) Act, 1883, up to the present the surplus profits have been divided between the working company and -die Treasury, will he take steps to have the provisions of the Act enforced in this case.

The answer to the first question is in the affirmative. I understand that the County Council of Donegal paid interest amounting to £91 18s. 2d. to the Lough Swills Co. in respect of the half year ended 31st December, 1900, and £100 in respect of the half year ended 30th June, 1901. The Board of Works were no parties to tins arrangement. The Board are advised that the county was not bound to make any payment under the guarantee until after the line was opened, and that payments made for a period an- terior to the opening of the line were voluntary payments not contemplated by the Tramways Act of 1883, and consequently that Section 5 of the Tramways Act of 1883 does not apply.

Seeing that the Treasury have received a portion of the money which should not have been paid, will it refund it to the county?

I will consider that.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state the number of children who are on the register of the piddle school at Tolsta, Island of Lewis, the period the school has been closed during the last six months, and the cause.

The number of pupils on the register of the public school at Tolsta at the end of the last school year was 196. The school was closed on the 3rd July by order of the Medical Officer of Health owing to au outbreak of typhoid fever. No notice of its being re-opened has been received. (13th November, 1902.)

I beg be to ask the hon. Member for the West Salford Division whether his attention has been drawn to the tact that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners applied last year to the rebuilding of certain denominational schools in Southwark a sum of £1,500 derived from funds belonging to the ecclesiastical branch of the City Parochial Charities Fund, which is prescribed by the City Parochial Charities Act, 1883, to be applied only to the maintenance of the fabric of churches and other ecclesiastical purposes; and, if so, in view of the provisions of the Act, will he explain why such action has been sanctioned.

The objects to which the funds paid to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners under the City Parochial Charities Act may be applied are by the Act described in such terms as to leave to the Commissioners a wider discretion than would appear from one hon, Member's Question, and, taking into consideration the special needs of the schools referred to in the Question. and the wants of the parish served by them, the Board considered the grant to be a legitimate application of a part of those funds.

It is specifically stated that the funds are to be applied to ecclesiastical purposes.

The hon. Gentleman's paraphrase has narrowed the meaning of the section.

As I was responsible for the drafting of this Act, may I ask on which words the hon. Gentleman relies?

The terms are rather lengthy.

Will the lion. Gentleman be good enough to read the terms?

Yes, the terms are as follows—

"To he applied" (by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners) "to the maintenance of the fabric of churches or to the better endowment of existing benefices, or to giving theological instruction to persons preparing for holy orders, or generally to extending the benefit of clerical or spiritual ministrations in accordance with the doctrines or by the ministers of the Church of England as by law established in the more populous districts of the metropolis."

Perhaps I may explain that I proposed to include the words in my Question, but the Clerk at the Table thought it too long, and I therefore had to paraphrase it.

I regret that the paraphrase is not wide enough.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if he is aware that three letters, dated 29th September, 20th October, and 3rd November respectively, have been sent to the Board of Education by Mr. W. H. Herbert, a member of the Countesthorpe (Leicestershire) School Board, a ratepayer in that parish, complaining that his child, aged six years, has been expelled from the board school, by a resolution of the School Board, carried by the casting vote of the chairman, the vicar of the parish (although there are vacant places in the board school), with the object of compelling him, a Nonconformist, to send his child to the Church of England school in the parish; and, seeing that up to the present Mr. Herbert has received only formal acknowledgments of the receipt of his letters, if he will state what steps the Board of Education proposes to take to protect the rights of this parent, and to prevent a recurrence of such cases. In putting the Question, may I express my regret that there is an inaccuracy in it as it appears on the Paper. I understand that the vicar, although the chairman of the Board, was not in the chair at the time of the occurrence.

The Board of Education have been in communication with the School Board on the subject. This was explained to Mr. Herbert in reply to his second letter. There is no accommodation for infants at the Countesthorpe board school. If the infant referred to is qualified for promotion at the end of the school year (December 31st), it will be admitted to the board school as an "older scholar." The Board of Education are not aware of any special reason for its earlier promotion, but further inquiry will be made. The hon. Member has been good enough to explain to me that the vicar was not present at the meeting of the School Board when the vote was taken.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether under the Education Bill an elementary school built by voluntary subscribers, but leased to a School Board, would have the status of a school provided by the education authority, or of a school not provided by the education authority; and what would be the position of such a school after the lease has terminated.

A school leased to a local education authority will be deemed to be a school provided by that authority. The latter part of the hon. Member's Question was answered by the First Lord of the Treasury in his reply to the Member for Denbighshire West on 5th November.†

Arising out of that answer, may I ask whether, in view of the great public interest taken in this question, and the fact that Amendments dealing with it have been closured, an opportunity will be given for the full discussion of the transfer of schools.

I cannot on behalf of the Government give an undertaking to that effect. The matter has been very fully discussed.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the case of Henry and others v. Hamill and Moody at the recent quarter sessions in Limavady; and whether, in view of the rights of property involved and which were left undecided, he proposes to take any action in the matter.

This was a civil action, and an appeal to the Judge of Assizes has been fudged. Even independently of this latter circumstance, it is not a case for the intervention of the Executive.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland when the Irish Local Government Board propose to hold the inquiry, already promised by them, with reference to the change of union boundaries in the counties of Londonderry and Donegal.

Before taking further action in the matter, the Board considers it desirable that the recently elected local bodies, who are affected by the proposal, should have an

† See page 149.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to a prosecution by the inspector of weights and measures at the last Roscrea Petty Sessions, when one of the presiding magistrates charged a solicitor with trying to upset the Court, and then left the Bench, so that the case could not be proceeded with and whether, to prevent in the future inconvenience, he will recommend the Lord Chancellor to appoint more justices of the peace in this district.

I am informed that there are usually five or six magistrates in attendance at these sessions, and that it rarely happens that only two are present. Applications for appoint-merits to the commission should be made to the lieutenant of the county

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state on what grounds the Local Government Board issued a sealed order prohibiting the election of dispensary doctors as county councillors; why was this order cancelled and a new sealed order issued declaring that no county councillor shall be qualified to be or continue as a poor law medical officer.

Both orders were made by the Board in the interests of the sick and destitute poor. The first order was rescinded in order to substitute the second, which secures the same object in a more correct manner.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what are the regulations that prevent the Department of Agriculture sanctioning the expenditure of funds by the Agricultural and Technical Instruction Committees of County Councils in the furtherance of instruction in the Irish language: and whether he proposes to remedy this matter.

There are no specific regulations of the kind referred to. Every application to the Department for such assistance is dealt with according to the particular circumstances of the case.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland how many police barracks are there in Belfast; the number of sergeants in each; and to what denomination do they belong.

This information cannot conveniently be given in the form of an answer to a Question, and I have, therefore, communicated it to my hon. friend.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any reply has been made to the complaint of the Rev. J. Curry, P.P., Drogheda, that the head teacher of the school of which he is manager has been subjected by the new rules to a loss of £ a year; and if he can state how similar complaints from other clerical managers and teachers in Ireland have been dealt with.

I received a letter from Father Curry, dated October 30th, and sent him an acknowledgment. I have since made an exhaustive examination into the cases submitted. I cannot undertake, as a general rule, to correspond at length over questions of administration with which the National Board is charged by statute. But, as these cases are typical, I propose to send the result of my inquiry to the rev. gentleman.

I beg to ask the Chief ecretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ire-and whether he can state the number of courthouses the use of which has been refused by the authorities to Rural District Councils for their quarterly meetings or road sessions; and whether the use of these buildings was refused to presentment sessions for meetings for road business prior to 1889.

The District Councils have no legal right to the use of courthouses. In some few instances, I believe, the high sheriffs and magistrates, the proper authorities, have, for reasons which appeared to them adequate, refused the District Councils permission to use these courthouses. But I have no information before me which would enable me to give a more definite reply-to either part of the Question.

said the County Councils had a right to the use of the courthouses, subject to certain statutory limitations, but District Councils had no such right.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received from Strokestown Union, and also from unions in the county Leitrim, resolutions in favour of union amalgamation; and whether, in view of the importance of this question in Ireland, he will appoint, a Commission to inquire into it, with power to dissolve unions that are no longer necessary.

Such resolutions have been received. The general question of union amalgamation has engaged the attention of the Local Government Board, and investigations have been in progress for some time past. The matter is admittedly one of much importance, and I shall consider during the Recess the means best adapted to attain the object in view.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be prepared to receive a deputation from the unions interested?

I could not receivea deputation before January. If the hon. Member will communicate with me I will consider the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a speech reported to have been delivered by a Mr. Joseph Macauley, J.P., at Belfast Water Board, on 6th inst., where it was proposed to present an address to His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; and what action, if any, the Government intend taking in the matter.

I have seen a news paper report of the speech in question The Executive is only concerned with speeches that involve a breach of the law.

Do I understand that a disloyal speech made against the Crown by a J.P. is not a direct violation of the obligation taken by him?

I think the hon. Member will see that we cannot discuss by way of Question and answer the exact character of the speech. It involved no breach of the law.

Has the right hon. Gentleman read the violent speeches of Orange magistrates?

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether complaints have been received by the Post Office authorities with reference to the late delivery of letters in Carndonagh and district silica the railway company began to convey the mails to that town from Londonderry; whether the mail service since the opening of the new Buncrana and Carndonagh Railway costs the Post Office less now than formerly: and whether he will arrange for the arrival of the mails at Carndonagh earlier than they arrive at present.

Inquiry is being made on the subject, and an answer shall be sent to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the product of the penny rate referred to in the Amendment to the Education Bill, put down by him after Clause 10 of the Bill, is intended to be the product of a penny rate charged on the full assessment the rateable property of the area rated, or only the product of the penny rate after the allowance of half the amount on agricultural land has been made.

The answer to my hon. friend is that the latter of the two alternatives the latter of the alternatives that he suggests is the correct one.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consider the desirability of the appointment of a Minister of Commerce, or of such a reform of the Board of Trade as to meet the demands of the commercial community of this country, that questions of trade and commerce shall be administered by a Minister equipped with greater powers.

In answer to the Question of my hon. friend, I have to say that I think I have indicated on previous occasions, and in reply to Questions from other quarters of the House, that I do not see that the position of the Board of Trade could be dealt with in isolation or apart from the general consideration of the position of the various Government offices. I am nor quite sure whit additional powers my hon. friend refers to in the last paragraph of his Question.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the failures of vessels of His Majesty's Navy, both when under trial and at sea, and the number of new vessels now condemned to costly repairs; also taking into consideration the cost of repairs as given in the late Return on Navy Boilers, he will consider the desirability of instituting by Royal Commission an into the Admiralty administration of naval affairs, especially as regards types of vessels, machinery, guns, men, and reserves.

The hon. Gentleman complains of the boiler policy of the Admiralty in the first part of the Question, and on that subject there has been a Committee of Inquiry, as he knows. I think the fact that, in the lion. Gentleman's judgment, the boiler policy of the Admiralty is not a satisfactory one, is hardly a sufficient reason for demanding a Royal Commission to inquire into the general administration of naval affairs—"types of vessels, machinery, guns, men, and reserves." It seems to go a good deal beyond boilers.

May I say I am not dealing with boilers exclusively. Am I to understand that the Government will do nothing to restore the confidence of the country in the Navy and its administration?

I hope that that confidence still remains unshaken, but, if it be shaken, I am very confident that a Royal Commission will not restore it.

said that when the Committee adjourned on the preceding night they were in the midst of a very interesting debate. He had found it impossible to reply in a word or two to the suggestions put forward from both sides of the House, and he therefore now proposed to state as briefly as he could the view of the Government on the present proposal. They shared as fully as anybody the desire that the attendance of all classes on the governing bodies should be as regular as possible. But he was bound to look at this question from the general point of view of local government. Hon. Gentlemen had sought to prove that there was a distinction between the committee of the local education authority and the committees of other bodies. So no doubt there was, but he doubted very much whether the distinction told in favour of the Amendment now under discussion. They had been told that it was very desirable that working men, whose interest in the educational system of their districts was very great, he might say greater than that of any other class, should be on the committee, but they were also told that the position of the education committee was one entirely subordinate to the local education authority. It was not the controlling body that was to be strengthened by the addition of working class members, it was only the intermediate authority. He thought that told rather against the Amendment than for it. He must ask the Committee not to be misled on this matter. If this proposal was adopted they would open a door which they would not be able to shut again. It was not for him to dictate to the Committee as to whether the change would be for better or for worse. But he had had some experience of local government, and he would ask whether there were not many men claiming to represent this or that particular interest, but not belonging to the industrial classes, who would be attracted to these governing bodies directly they were sure they would he relieved of all costs. No doubt the proposal before the Committee was a guarded one, but how were they going to keep it within such narrow limits? They were asked to only sanction reasonable travelling expenses. What were the travelling expenses of a member of the committee? Was it realised that in many of these cases miles of roads had to be travelled over—that frequently it entailed a journey the day before? [Cheers.] He appreciated those cheers. It made the position of the workman harder still, but the real difficulty was not the expenses. There was also the loss of one or two days work. There were committees of the County Council whose work, in his judgment, was quite as important—in the interests of the working classes—as that of a committee of the local education authority. Let them take the case of the Lunatic Asylums Committee. In the work of that body the working man had a special interest. The asylums were often situated in a distant corner of the county, but the committee had to meet regularly, and its members had to travel long journeys in order to get there. Their proceedings were keenly watched by the working classes, whose relatives had unfortunately so often to take refuge within the walls of the institution The members of the committee were not reimbursed their expenses. [Cries of "They are paid."] No, travelling expenses were only paid in cases where the asylum or workhouse was outside the county area, and where the members of the committee had consequently to travel beyond that area. They received nothing when they merely had to travel from I heir own homes to a place within the county area.

Under the schemes passed wider the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, third class travelling expenses are paid to members attending not only the meetings of the central board, but also the meetings of the county governing bodies.

said he was not aware of that. He was dealing with the local authorities which were within the cognisance of his Department, and with which he had personal contact. He might take another illustration. Hon. Members familiar with the North of England, knew that there were many unions where the guardians had miles of roads to traverse in order to get to workhouses near to which there was no railway station. They had to attend a variety of committees, but they were not paid their expenses. He was not arguing against the principle of reasonable travelling expenses, but he was trying to point out that there was a practical difficulty in limiting the expenses in the way proposed in this Amendment. It was not for him nor for the Government to ask the Committee not to take this step if they thought it a right step to take. But let them take it with their eyes open, and not, as they were asked to take it on the previous night, on the ground that this proposal could be limited within these narrow lines. This proposal was far too serious for the Government, to give their assent to it. There were no exceptional circumstances in regard to the education committee which did not apply to other committees. If this proposal was adopted, he thought they would find that pressure would be exercised to grant the same privileges to members of other local authorities, and that pressure they would not be able to resist. Then it would be but a short step to the House of Commons. Hitherto they had successfully, and as he believed rightly, resisted all proposals to cast on public funds the costs incurred by men who were members of these local governing bodies. If they now gave way in this case they would be unable to stop at the payment of travelling expenses; every man who devoted himself to local or public service would expect to have extended to him the right to payment of all out-of-pocket expenses. This was therefore a much wider question than that of the local education committees, and he would ask the Committee not on this occasion by a side wind to upset the principle which Parliament had hitherto upheld, but to adhere to the sound principle that those who took part in local or Imperial government should do so with all the risks and loss that the service entailed.

said the argnment of the right hon. Gentleman meant that it was impossible that men of humble means could take part in the administration of this Act. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Nothing of the kind."] The right hon. Gentleman agreed that long distances would have to be travelled, and that men of humble means would not be able to undertake the work.

said the right hon. Gentleman entirely misrepresented what he had said. He had pointed out that the expenses could not be limited as it was proposed to limit them in this Amendment. Men of the very class the right hon. Gentleman alluded to found means of attending the meetings of Boards of Guardians without having their expenses paid.

said men of humble means could not afford to travel long distances by train or carriage. To his mind the interruption of the hon. Member for the Flint Boroughs disposed of the whole argument of the right hon. Gentleman. This terrible precedent which was to ruin our local administration had been in operation for a considerable time in Wales. There they had long distances to travel, and railway communication was by no means easy. It seemed to hint to be a simple proposition. What was there in it to give rise to this alarm? He thought the Committee would do extremely well to accept the Amendment.

said the argument of the last speaker reminded him of the tale of the little boy who when remonstrated with for pitting out his tongue to his master replied that it was only a little one. He could not help thinking that those who were advocating the payment of these expenses out of the rates had their little tongues in their cheek. He was strongly opposed to the Amendment. In his estimation, working men were a fetish, unduly worshipped in this House. But by this Amendment it was proposed to pay the travelling expenses, not of working men, but of the committee, and these expenses might include their day's work and their food. If they sanctioned the payment of the expenses of members of our representative institutions, they opened the floodgates of unlimited expense. Hon. Members opposite claimed "economy" and "efficiency" as their watchwords. Where was the economy to be found in paying the expenses of their representatives on representative institutions? He could not see it in view of the fact that there were so many men of leisure and ability will-mg to do the work for nothing. This proposal had been made before, and always successfully resisted on the ground that it was not consistent with economy. If it was admitted now it would he without precedent, and would be admitted for the first time in the legislation of this House. If they paid the expenses of the education committees it would conduce not to efficiency but to jobbery; it might lead to outside influences being brought to hear on the County Councils to elect a class of man whose services would not conduce to efficiency. Upon these grounds he should vote against the Amendment.

said this was a matter of vital importance to working men and people with small means, and he had always contended that the parents of the children who went to these schools should be able to see that the education given to their children was such as they approved of, and this it was quite impossible for them to do unless the Bill was amended in the direction proposed. It was stated that the payment of travelling expenses was introducing a new principle; but on the London County Council the committees had conveyances supplied to carry them round on inspection work, and when railways were more convenient for the purpose of conveyance in carrying out inspection railway fares were paid. Had this been a question of payment for services on the committee he should not have supported the Amendment, but this was a case of enabling the parents of the children to serve on the committees, and it was on that ground that he supported it.

expressed his regret that the President of the Local Government Board should have run away immediately after having fired his shot, because he had made a confident statement which ought to receive an answer, and which would receive an answer that he ought to have stayed to hear. The right hon. Member for West Monmouth-shire who followed the right hon. Gentleman dealt with the subject generally and not specifically with regard to the present case. The hon. Member opposite and the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board both took the line which was familiar to all Government Departments. It was the line adopted by the Treasury with regard to every proposal made to them. The consecrated phrase of the Treasury to all the other Departments who made these proposals was not couched in very good language. It was, "These proposals wind open a very serious door." He would be glad to see the "very serious door" opened to which the right hon. Gentleman objected. He would go even further. As a specific proposal this was much stronger than any other. In the case of Durham the county town was almost in the centre of the county, and around that town were a great many mines. The result was that the hon. Member for Mid Durham, and many miners of that district, were able to serve on the County Council; but in many mining counties School Boards were elected for particular districts, and on those boards admirable work was done. The parents of the children in the milling districts were keener about education than anybody else in those districts, and by the abolition of the School Boards these men would be knocked out of education altogether. The object of the Amendment was to retain the services of these men. The right hon. Gentleman was guilty of an error when he said there was no precedent for this; there was the Welsh precedent, and there was also the precedent that some members of the Fisheries Board were paid their expenses. This, therefore, was a practical Amendment. With regard to the Amendment to the Amendment, although, for convenience, a general discussion was being taken upon it, he thought the mover ought to say clearly how it was going to be dealt with. He was not quite clear as to its effect; if it allowed the counties to pick and choose it would be most objectionable. [An HON. MEMBER: That is what it does do!] If that was so, then, of course, it ought to be opposed. Those who had been able to pay their own expenses and who acted outside the area for local authorities had generally thought it their duty to accept their expenses along with the others, because they thought the question of expenses should be a general and not a particular one. The point upon which the President of the Local Government Board relied was merely technical. If a member of a Board of Guardians in the south-west of London paid a visit to the north-east of London, his expenses were paid. Surely a similar course might be taken in a large county where the distances and the time occupied were much greater. It was not right to use the merely technical objection that in the former case the visit was outside the district. Many School Board areas would, under this Bill, be embraced within the new district⁁the county—and therefore members would have to travel altogether outside the existing districts. It was really on the lines of present practice to apply the Amendment to cases of that kind. On the grounds he had stated he should oppose the Amendment to the Amendment, and support the original proposal.

said that when his hon. and learned friend moved the Amendment to the Amendment on the previous night there was a considerable measure of agreement or approval on the Government side of the House, and no distinct expression of disagreement on the other side. It appeared now, however, that his hon. and learned friend was between the upper and nether millstones, inasmuch as his proposal neither commanded agreement on that side nor met with acceptance on the other. At the same time it was a most sensible and reasonable Amendment. There had been brought before the Committee two attitudes of mind, with neither of which he was able to sympathise or agree. The first was that of the President of the Local Government Board, who used the "open door" argument—that they were opening a door which they would never be able to shut. The door was, in fact, already open, and the present was not the period in our history in which to talk about the "thin end of the wedge." There were no great questions in which the thin end of the wedge had not already been inserted. The other attitude of mind was that of Labour members, who declared they were not ashamed to say they needed the money, but they would be ashamed to take it unless those who did not need it were also made to take it. That was a fantastic proposition to which very few Members on that side of the House, no matter how progressive their views might be, would be inclined to assent. Practically two considerations were before the Committee, each of which was complicated and controversial, and each supported by a considerable body of opinion. The first was that they did not want to settle the great question of the payment of representatives on a side and comparatively small issue on an Education Bill. They, on that side, would not shrink from a settlement of that question. But he, personally, would draw a great distinction between travelling expenses and remuneration for actual services, whether in regard to Members of Parliament or members of local bodies. The second consideration had been urged by almost every speaker in the debate. The schools concerned were the schools attended by the children of the people in humble circumstances, and if there was any board upon which the working classes ought to be represented it was the education authority. It was quite evident, however, that it would be impossible for them to be so represented unless there travelling expenses to and from the place of meeting were defrayed. These two considerations came into collision, and out of that collision the present question arose. How were the two points of view to be reconciled? How were the poorer members of these authorities to be enabled to attend to their duties without at the same time conceding or affirming the great principle of the payment of representatives? The Amendment of his hon. and learned friend presented a safe, easy, clear, convenient, and suitable method of solving the problem. It conceded no great principle; it affirmed no small principle that had not already been conceded. On the other hand, it dealt with the immediate emergency, removed the actual concrete grievance operated through the very authority the Bill proposed to set up, and acted in a spirit of compromise which harmonised with the general principle of a Bill which in itself was a great compromise. If this half-way measure, this friendly and conciliatory Amendment, was to be treated with disdain and contumely by hon. Gentlemen opposite, he should certainly urge his hon. and learned friend not to press it, and then they on that side would have to go into the Division Lobby against the other side on the main principle. 1f, however, the Opposition were prepared to accept this reasonable concession, they would meet with a certain amount of support on that side of the House.

said that the Amendment to the Amendment, as interpreted by its mover, was one which many on that side could not accept. It would lead to diversity of practice in different parts of the country.

Does not the hon. Member trust the discretion of the local authorities?

said the discretion of every local authority would be influenced by local circumstances; and they would have a practice adopted on one side of the boundary which was not followed on the other, and friction and discontent would be the result. Private arrangements of this sort, in which money passed from one to another, were not desirable in the carrying on of local government except under uniform rules. He supported the original Amendment on the same ground as the President of the Local Government Board opposed it, viz., in the interests of local government. In numerous instances, efficient representatives had been obliged to give up their seats on County and Rural District Councils because they could not afford the travelling expenses and also the time to attend, and local government necessarily became less efficient in consequence. The question of the education of the children of the people was a wider interest than any other matter of local government, inasmuch as it affected every-family in the land. The management of lunatic asylums was not a fair parallel case, as that had to be carried on by specially qualified men, and only affected relatively few people. Many of the men who had served on the School Boards would be disfranchised from serving on the education committees, because of their inability to sit on the councils, and because working men could not afford to go from one end of the county to the other. He should certainly vote for the Amendment, because it would satisfy a just and righteous claim, and add to the efficiency of the education authority. He hoped the First Lord of the Treasury, if he spoke again, would support the view of finding some way out of the difficulty in which they were placed.

said the right hon. Gentleman had told them that this was part of a large matter. He wished to ask the Committee where was this matter going to stop? It would stop in this House and not before. If they were going to pay these particular men and women to come forward and offer their services, why should they not pay other men find other women who came forward? If they did that well and good. He warned the Committee that if they adopted this proposal it would not stop there. The President of the Local Government Board told them that the Amendment would open the door to a dangerous precedent. In this case he was not in favour of the policy of the open door.

said he was anxious that the Committee should not give up the Amendment to the Amendment in a hurry. He was of the opinion that his hon. and learned friend had put a wrong interpretation upon this proposal. In order to make the meaning clear he suggested the insertion of the word "all." It would then read—

"Including such reasonable traling ex penses of all the menders of the education committee as the local education authority may think fit."

I hope the Division may very shortly be taken. Perhaps the Committee will think it only respectful that I should say one or two words upon the questions which have been raised. I am sorry that I was not present during the debate last night, as I should like to have heard the speeches, especially those made by hon. Gentlemen who claim, and claim justly, to specially represent the working classes, which I am informed were not only speeches of great ability but also showed great moderation. I had not that good fortune, and therefore I speak under that disadvantage. I really have only two points to urge upon the Committee One is this: If you mean to make a great change in the existing practice with regard to the payment of expenses of persons serving upon public bodies is this Education Bill a convenient place to do it? [OPPOSITION cries of "Yes, it is."] I am aware that an hon. friend of mine below the gangway, and hon. Gentlemen opposite say that this is no innovation, and that it has already been made in the case of the Welsh Intermediate Education scheme and in the case of the London Government Bill. I do not think either of those measures is on all fours with the present scheme. In the first place the Welsh Intermediate scheme is different from this because it says that a third-class ticket is to be paid for from station to station, and that by no means covers the ground of expenses. That was not introduced in the debate on the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, but it was accepted as part of a scheme brought forward under the 1ct. That is very different from a precedent deliberately adopted by this House with regard to any great question of local government. The other question, I am distinctly informed by the President of the Local Government Board, is really no precedent at all, and if that takes place which my hon. friend tells us upon his authority, and from his own knowledge, does take place on the London County Council the London County Council are breaking the law and they are liable to be surcharged by some future Mr. Cockerton. So much for the two precedents which have been alleged. I think it will be admitted that they are hardly in front. I bring the Committee back to this: you are attempting to initiate a very great change in our practice as regards local government. Is this Education Bill an occasion to do it? I venture very strongly to urge upon the Committee that it is a most inconvenient occasion, partly because this Bill surely arouses enough controversies without importing this into it; and also because this Bill alone among local government Bills does give the smaller localities and parishes of all classes special opportunities of taking their share in the work of education. Let the Committee remember that while the committee whose expenses are to be met is only an advisory committee, and advisory upon general principles, the actual management of the school rests, in the case of voluntary schools or non-provided schools, in a body of managers, necessarily local, one of which will be appointed by the minor local authority, the Parish Council or District Council, and the other will be appointed, no doubt, by the education authority, and they will probably appoint somebody intimately acquainted with the details of the work of that district and capable of attending, without great personal sacrifices, to the work. That is the case of the non-provided schools. As to the provided schools, it rests entirely with the education authority, who can take care—and certainly will take care—that the parents of the children will have an adequate opportunity of taking their share in the management. Therefore, I should say that of all Bills touching on local government this is the very last Bill upon which you ought to make this change, because the grievance which the hon. Gentleman so eloquently refers to exists in a far less degree than it does in any other county or borough work. There is one other reason which I will venture to urge upon the Committee, and it is that this is a very bad occasion on which to make this change. Last night we had a great debate in regard to the burden thrown upon the ratepayers by this Bill. I have never denied that the ratepayers of counties would desire to see the teachers better paid, and the schools better equipped than they are now, but when I have uttered these educational prophecies I have been met by the answer that the ratepayers will be so reluctant to pay that they will starve the schools. I do not think they will, but I do think that an Amendment of this kind in creases the temptation thrown upon them to starve education. Remember also that every shilling you take out of the rates for the purpose of paying the travelling expenses of members is money taken away from the higher purposes of education, which this Bill is intended to serve, and I would seriously suggest to the Committee that it is most unwise for us to make the burden thrown upon the rates by this Bill heavier and more onerous than it would otherwise be. The Committee will observe that I have carefully refrained from making any pronouncement upon the broad question of this Amendment. It is far too large a question to be touched upon at the end of an enormous discussion like that which has taken place upon this Bill. Let the House, when the proper occasion comes, deal with it as a whole as affecting every branch of public administration, and affecting both local and Imperial government, but do not take this occasion of the thirty-ninth day of the Committee stage of this Bill to initiate for the first time in our County Councils and municipal legislation, a change which must inevitably have such far-reaching effects in the future.

said they were very familiar with the argument about the proper occasion, for it was an occasion which never came. He remembered that when they were discussing the Scotch Local Government Bill of 1888, the First Lord of the Treasury- told them that that was not the proper occasion.

That was a much better occasion than this.

said he would try to give, in two or three words, the reasons why they thought this was the proper occasion. They were by this Bill extinguishing School Boards in small areas, upon which poor people who could not pay travelling expenses could sit.

But they can sit on the boards of management.

contended that by this Bill they were depriving the people who had hitherto had a chance of regulating the education of their own children of the opportunity which they had up to the present enjoyed. The right hon. Gentleman said they had the hoards of management. Did he remember the discussions which took place on Clause 8? He considered it essential that on these education committees, which were to have practically the bulk of the work, some opportunity should be given to the parents to bear the part in the work which they had hitherto done under the School Board system. They had been told that by adopting tins Amendment proposed by the hon. Member for the Barnstaple Division they would take a step which would have consequences in the future. That was an argument they had often heard, but his answer to it was this. They were asked for the sake of a possibly distant object, a consequence which might not arise in our time, a consequence which would have to be determined by totally different arguments, to sacrifice an opportunity of making these bodies much more effective than they other wise would he by admitting people to work in which they were interested, and who were anxious, as well as competent, to discharge it.

said it was a fact that the Sheffield School Board and most other School Boards had habitually paid for conveyances for members when trim yelling around inspecting sites and schools. The same remark applied to cases where Sheffield magistrates visited public-houses in connection with licensing matters. The President of the Local Government Board was entirely wrong (and the Prime Minister was wrong in following him) in supposing that there were not lots of precedents all over the country for a proposal such as that now before the Committee.

said if they were going to divide they should not vote in the dark. His hon. and learned friend said that the County Council would have the right of picking and choosing. The Committee ought to know whether that was a proper construction of the words before voting. His opinion was that there would be no discussion in the County Council at all. He asked the Attorney General to state whether in his opinion that was the proper reading of the words.

asked whether in the event of the rejection of these two Amendments there would be power under the scheme to provide for the payment of travelling expenses? Would the Government consider that they had the right under the Bill to sanction payment of travelling expenses where the County Council desired it? The Prime Minister tried to conjure up the bogey of the rates. One experience was worth all the arguments of the Prime Minister on that point. They had power in Wales to pay the travelling expenses of the members of the governing body. He knew a county where the total travelling expenses, third class, amounted in a single year to less than one-fiftieth of a penny on the rates. It was misleading to talk to the Committee about the burden on the rates in a matter of this sort, when the Prime Minister was introducing a Bill which would involve a rate of 4½d. in Gloucestershire, 6d. in Liverpool, and 1s. in some districts, in order to keep up. sectarian schools.

said he had been asked to state his opinion in regard to the construction to be put on the Amendment. He did think that the words were not very clear, but he would be inclined to say that the proper construction was that which the author of the Amendment had put on it, namely, that the County Council would have a discretion to pay all, or only some, of the travelling expenses, as they deemed fit. With regard to the other question, he was not sufficiently familiar with the provisions in Wales, to enable him to give an off-hand answer to the question the hon. Member had put to him, but he thought there would be no general power under the Act to introduce a provision into a scheme dealing with this matter. He would he glad to go into the question with the hon. Member, but he was not prepared offhand to give an opinion on a point of this kind, which involved special consideration.

Does that mean that in the opinion of the Attorney General there will be no power to introduce into a scheme a provision for the payment of even third class travelling expenses in England?

I do not think there will be.

, in moving the next Amendment, said that he represented the largest division in tins country, and an ever-increasing one, and he ventured to say that this Bill had not been drafted to meet the case of his constituents, who would suffer much under its provisions. It was said that the ratepayers would profit more under the Imperial grants than before, but in his case nothing of the kind would occur. The district would be poorer and the Imperial grant would be less under the Bill unless a number of Amendments were made in this Clause. At the present time 97 per cent. of the children in the district were educated in board schools, and only 3 per cent. in the voluntary schools. The result was that the district would have to provide an additional school rate of a farthing. In framing the Bill no consideration had been shown for extreme cases. He noticed that the education rate would be levied on the basis of the district rate instead of the poor rate.

Only in one case.

said that there was an Amendment lower down on the Paper which would remove the rate from the basis of assessment for the poor rate to that of the district rate. The East India Docks, under the Public Health Act, would be assessed on £14,000 instead of on £27,000, which they now paid; and the Great Eastern Railway, instead of being assessed on £9,900, would be assessed on only £2,600. The result would he that the houses of only £10 rental would have to make up the deficiency. The result would be inefficiency, the schools would be starved, and many people would not pay their rates. He knew that his was an extreme case, where the population had increased from 8,000 to over 100,000, but in framing a Bill of this magnitude care should have been taken so that no anomaly would occur in the way of increased burdens. He appealed to his right hon. friend in charge of the Bill to so amend the Clause that in extreme cases, like that presented by his constituency, the ratepayers would not be put into a worse position than before.

said he did not quite follow his hon. friend in his reference to an especial hardship on a particular district. He admitted, however, that there was a flaw in the proposal in the Bill in regard to the incidence of the rate. That was not altogether the fault of those who were responsible for the Bill. It had probably escaped his hon. friend's attention that, under the Technical Instruction Act, the rate which could be levied was, in the case of urban sanitary districts, which wore the local authorities for the purpose, the only general rate which existed in them, viz., the sanitary rate, which was liable to deduction in regard to railways, canals, etc. It was thought at first that it was better to leave things as they were; but the Government realised later that it would be a grave injustice if, in the area of a Borough or a County Council the incidence of the rate was to be the poor rate subject only to ordinary deductions, while in sanitary districts it was to be the sanitary rate. His hon. friend said that the Amendment in the name of the Secretary to the Board of Education would not altogether meet the case. On the contrary, that Amendment met the-case more completely and fully than did the Amendment of his hon. friend. The variation was not great, and he ventured to hope that his hon. friend and other hon. Members who had similar Amendments on the Paper, would be willing to withdraw then], and allow the Amendment of his hon. friend the Secretary to the Board of Education to be put from the Chair. The only real difference between the Amendments was one of detail, and not of principle. They all sought to effect the same result, namely, to make the. incidence of the rate for education the poor rate assessment and not the sanitary rate, which was liable to deductions. But there was a small difference. Under the Amendments of his hon. friends, the' incidence of the rate would not be the incidence which rested upon the-county rate basis. The effect of the Amendment of his hon. friend the Secretary to-the Board of Education would be this—in a County Council area the cost of education would be defrayed out of the general rate levied over the whole area having for its basis the county rate basis, and in the case of a borough the poor rate basis or the borough rate basis. Difficulties in connection with assessment did not arise in borough areas as they did in county areas. In the county areas they had to deal with inequalities between different unions; whereas there was not the same conflict in the case of a borough area except in very rare instances, though it did arise in most cases where there was more than one union in the area, but in a mitigated form. There it was met by the power possessed by the Borough Council to have its own assessment, if not satisfied with the union assessment. There remained only the-urban sanitary districts to be dealt with. In these districts there was no rate similar to the borough rate or the county rate; there was only the sanitary rate, which would not do. Therefore they proposed to take the ordinary poor rate assessment; the only detail worthy of mention being that in the rather limited number of cases where the sanitary district was divided into parishes, the assessment as between the parishes would be on the poor rate basis and not on the borough rate or county rate basis. He hoped the Committee would accept the Amendment of his hon. friend the Secretary to the Board of Education as dealing more completely with the matter.

said that agricultural Land which was only assessed at half the poor rate Would not come under the Amendment of the Secretary to the Board of Education.

said that that would not in any way affect his hon. friends Amendment.

said he wished to express his very great satisfaction at the explanation given by his right hon. friend, and the promise he had made on behalf of the Government. The fact was that When the Clause was drafted a very serious and inexcusable mistake was made. Under the Clause as it stood, manufactories and householders would have to pay a very much larger proportion of tine rate than the owners of land, railway companies, docks and canals. Allusion had been made to Rumford, but many other constituencies were similarly situated, hl his own constituency, there were three railways covering a large acreage, and there were also canals, which would escape their fair proportion if the Clause remained as it was. They would only have to contribute 3d. in the £, whereas householders would have to contribute 1s. in the £Therefore, he regarded the Amendment of the Secretary to the Board of Education, which had been explained so clearly by his right hon. friend, as a measure of justice; and he hoped it would meet with the entire approval of the Committee.

said he had not the least objection to the withdrawal of the Amendment, and the substitution of the Amendment of the Secretary to the Board of Education. He agreed with what had been said by the right hon. Gentleman in support of the Amendment. The doctrines on which the hon. Member based the Amendment before the Committee were applicable to various parts of the country, and were not confined to the case of Essex. He submitted that it would not be in order to follow the line of argument raised by the hon. Member opposite on the Government Amendment, though he hoped they would have an opportunity of raising the question they wished to raise on (b) (e) and (d).

said he did not see much advantage in prolonging the present discussion. He merely wished to say on behalf of the urban district of Kettering and Many similar districts that the proposals of the Government were perfectly satisfactory to those authorities, and wished to thank the Government for the Amendment they had wisely placed on the Paper.

said in withdrawing his Amendment he wished to thank the Government for the Amendment they had put down. At the same time, he should say that an immense amount of ill-feeling and a sense of injustice had been created, because the Amendment had not been thought of before.

said the Government now proposed that the expenses of the Education Act should be paid out of the poor rate instead of the county fund or the borough rate. Did the Government, in making this change, propose to deal with the great inequalities of assessment to the poor rate? Some District Councils and Corporations assessed on one system, and some on another. In rural districts rent was taken as the basis of assessment in one union, and estimates of annual value in the other. He thought there ought to be uniformity in the system of assessment.

said he doubted whether it would be possible within the scope of the present Bill to deal with the large and complicated question which had just been mentioned by his hon. friend. There was an announcement in the King's Speech that legislation on the subject was contemplated, but it was not introduced.

said that that was quite true. One of the great difficulties of the local taxation question was valuation and assessment, and until they had dealt with valuation and assessment they could not approach the local taxation question with any degree of satisfaction or hope of a final settlement. As the noble Lord, however, knew, time did not permit of the introduction of many measures, and that referred to was one of them.

said the object of his Amendment was to meet certain exceptional cases which had not been provided for in the Bill. It was well known that by Act of Parliament no borough rate could be levied unless the borough fund was insufficient. He, however, understood that the President of the Local Government Board was prepared to accept the Amendment, therefore he would say no more about it.

said the point raised undoubtedly required attention. There were cases where the borough fund had proved sufficient hitherto for all local purposes, yet where it might become exhausted unless sufficient provision were made. As the tendency of modern legislation was in the direction of consolidation, and not of separation, he would accept the Amendment as amended by his hon. friend, which would limit its application to those cases where a separate rate had not been issued up to the commencement of this Act.

said after the clear explanation given by his right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade the Amendment he now rose to move would need very little explanation from him. The Amendment was an important one. Its object was to provide that the education expenses of an urban district should not be raised out of the district rate, but out of the poor rate, in order to avoid the exceptions to which the urban district rate was liable.

drew attention to the fact that in this case the right hon. Gentleman opposite hind adopted the objectionable practice of legislation by reference, which could, he submitted, in this case have easily been avoided. The lines of the Section of the Act of 1876 winch it was proposed to incorporate were only six or seven, and it would have been much more convenient to the bodies who would have to administer the Bill if he had incorporated those lines bodily rather than to refer them to a separate Act.

said that he was in general agreement with the observations made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, but he submitted that this was a case where the course taken was a desirable one, as it thus made it clear that the expenses were to be raised in the same way as under the Act of 1876.

thought the Attorney General's remarks had not answered the objection.

asked if there was any necessity for the words at the end. He had no legal knowledge with regard to it, but was it not possible that, if those words were left in, they might be considered as relating only to the expenses referred to in that particular section.

thought that this was essentially a case where legislation by reference ought not to have been resorted to. It would have been a very simple thing to have incorporated the words referred to in the new Act. The only justification for legislating by reference was the undesirability of overloading an Act with unnecessary words. That was not the case here.

admitted there was much in the contention of the hon. and learned Member who had just spoken, but at the same time pointed out that the Amendment had been considered cart fully by those responsible, who considered this was the most convenient form in which to move it. He had, however, taken notice of what had been said, and would consider whether it would not be advisable to alter the form at another stage of the Bill.

said the Amendment he now moved had been pressed upon him by urban districts whose councils were autonomous authorities for the purposes of Part III., and who also had power to raise a penny rate for education other than elementary under Section 3. Some of these districts had the strongest desire to carry out a bold policy of providing for secondary education, and were willing to exercise all their powers and make all possible sacrifices for this object. But it was urged on behalf of the ratepayers that where they had paid a local rate under Section the rating power of the County Council should be exercised in the district only to supplement and expand the secondary education within such a district itself, and that the district should not be called upon to contribute also to the general expenses of secondary education throughout the county.

pointed out that the Amendment, if accepted, would lead to an anomalous condition of things, because, while it would exempt Urban District Councils, the Borough Councils would be left untouched. The issue, however, was a very simple one. The principle of the Bill was that there should be concurrent powers in the councils of boroughs of 10,000 population and urban districts of 20,000 and the County Councils. But the intention of the Government had been that while those concurrent powers should be preserved, every inducement should be given to the County Councils, not only to exercise, but to exercise fully, their concurrent power, the aim being that the County Councils should be the main directing and controlling authority, while the local authority should have power, if they wished, to give special or extra aid to the development of education in their own area. Under these circumstances the Government could not accept an Amendment which would deprive County Councils of the means of doing that which it was hoped they would do.

agreed that the Amendment would strike a heavy blow at the idea of making the County Council the local education authority. It was true that he supported an Amendment to give certain large powers to the smaller boroughs, but the idea of those who supported the proposal was that of not depriving the small places of the powers they possessed, and at the same time encouraging them to exercise them in a subordinate capacity. The present Amendment would go a great deal further, and practically place the small authorities in a position of much greater independence, and reduce the County Councils to the position of subordinate authorities. He did not think that was a proper thing to do, and he hoped his hon. friend would not press the Amendment.

asked what would be the position of a borough like that of Neath, which, under Clause 3, had power to levy a rate of 1d. in the £ for the purposes of Part 11 of the Bill. Could the County Council of Glamorgan levy a rate of 2d. for similar purposes in the area of the borough of Neath, and the municipal corporation of Neath levy another rate of 1d?

Yes.

said that in that case, if the borough of Neath raised a penny rate to develop the secondary schools within its area, they would have only a very moderate control over the action of the County Council in regard to the two penny rate. He thought that was hardly a sound position in which to leave these matters.

pointed out that that was the law at present; it was not a change made by this Bill. The powers in regard to secondary education were concurrent in the County Council and the municipal authority.

said the case to which he referred was one in which there was already a rating power vested in the County Council for the purposes of secondary education quite apart from the Technical Instruction Act. In Neath they had a county school, and the borough contributed its share of the halfpenny rate under the Act of 1889. Was it a statesmanlike proposition to introduce this kind of divergence between the people who happened to live in Neath and those in, say, Briton Ferry, two places between which there was hardly any distinction to be drawn, but the latter of which did not come under Clause 3 of the Bill?

said that no doubt distinctions would arise as between localities which in themselves were very similar, but that question was fully debated at an earlier stage of the proceedings on the Bill. These authorities and areas possessing certain powers were in existence in many cases, and in any reform it had always been found impossible to ignore them, no matter from which party in the House the reform proceeded. In this particular case he did not think Neath was in reality a sufferer. In one respect it was better off than the remainder of the district, because, although it might pay more for it, it had the power to spend money in its own interest and according to its own inclination.