To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what are the names of the obsolete vessels offered for sale by auction at Chatham this day; which of them have been sold; and what was the price realised in each case. (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The names of the vessels offered for sale at Chatham, all of which were sold, and the prices realised, are as follows:—

To ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether the proposed discharge of dockyard employees at Portsmouth can be deferred until the commencement of the summer, when it will be easier for unemployed men to obtain work than it is at present. (Answered by Mr. Arthur Lee.) Although it would not be possible, in the interests of the service, to adopt the hon. Member's suggestion, the discharges will be carried out as gradually as possible, and every care has been taken to effect such reductions as are necessary with the least possible amount of hardship. It is hoped that the number of discharges will not at any time exceed twenty-five in a week at Portsmouth.

To ask the Postmaster-General if in the fixing of the maximum wages of sorting clerks and telegraphists regard has been had to the relative cost of living in the different towns; and, if so, why the maximum of this class in Lincoln, Boston, and Peterborough is 48s. and in Grantham, where the cost of living is higher than in those towns, the maximum is only 44s.; and why the Lincoln postmen are 2s. higher in their maximum than Grantham. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) Hitherto the wages of sorting clerks and telegraphists in the provinces have been based solely on the volume of business transacted at the particular office, but the cost of living also will in future be taken into consideration. If the sorting clerks and telegraphists or the postmen at Grantham desire to make any representations to me respecting their pay I will consider whether any increase is warranted.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the Civil Service Commissioners for a number of years immediately following the Fawcett revision of salaries in the telegraph service published notices offering the prospect of a salary of £190 to London telegraphists; and, if so, whether he will state the number of officials who entered the service under these terms of service, and the number of persons receiving this paper of the Civil Service Commissioners who are now in receipt of £190 per annum in London. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am fully aware of the circumstance to which the hon. Member refers, but I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by giving the information for which he asks. The prospect of rising to £190 a year by promotion to the senior class still exists, with the difference that the maximum has now been raised to £200 a year. Access to the class is obtained in the same manner as heretofore, namely, by promotion on the occurrence of vacancies.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that learners in the telegraph department, Enniskillen, over the age of nineteen years, were paid 15s. to 18s. per week during last summer for substituting the staff on leave; that, while considering the question of improving the pay of this class, he has decided, as dating from 1st April, that alterations were to take place; and that, as a result of his changes, the learners have been offered 8s. 6d. and 10s. per week for the work previously recompensed by 15s. and 18s.; and, if so, whether he will explain the reason for this reduction. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am aware that there are cases of the kind to which the hon. Member refers, and I have already issued general instructions that learners already employed as substitutes may be given the option of retaining their present varying rates of pay as learners and as substitutes in lieu of the constant rates for learners with two years service and upwards indicated in my announcement of the 28th ultimo.

To ask the Post master-General whether he is aware that a telegraphist named Bullamore submitted a certificate from a private doctor at Brixton, stating that he was suffering from post influenzal debility, and reeded further rest; that the official medical adviser certified that Bullamore's health was as usual, and no rest was required; that subsequently a specialist certified that Bullamore's symptoms were genuine, and that he could only expect to get relief by prolonged rest and quiet, and that the medical department decline to act upon the advice of the specialist; and, if so, will he state the attitude that his Department adopts towards the certificates of private practitioners. (Answerea by Lord Stanley.) I have received special reports respecting Mr. Bullamore's health from his private medical attendant and from a specialist, as well as from the Chief Medical Officer of the Post Office, and an aural surgeon whom that gentleman consulted. I have decided, at the suggestion of the Chief Medical Officer, to lay the whole matter before the Medical Referee to the Treasury. As regards certificates from private practitioners, full consideration is given to them, but I am bound to be guided by the opinion of the medical officers of the Department in such matters. In cases of doubt the Medical Referee is consulted.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has made his promised inquiry into the circumstances connected with the telegram handed in at Clones rail office on 4th of March; and, if so, will he state the result of his inquiry. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The reply is in the affirmative, and I have communicated the result to the hon. Member.

To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture can he give an approximate statement of the loss incurred by butchers in 1904 from tuberculosis; and will he favour the introduction of a Bill on the subject this session. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I am not in possession of the information desired by the hon. Member, and, whilst recognising the importance of the subject to which the Question refers, I am afraid that I could not hold out any promise that the Government would introduce a Bill this session dealing with it.

To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture what foreign nations have inspectors in this country to detect adulteration of their butter; and how many inspectors are there belonging to each nation. (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) So far as I am aware, no foreign nations have inspectors in this country to detect adulteration of their butter. Several countries, including Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Hungary, Germany, and the United States have appointed agricultural, representatives here, but their duty is rather to find fresh markets for their country's produce, and to supply information as to the state of trade, than to detect adulteration.

:To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the number of assessments upon which income-tax was collected in each of the years ending 31st March, 1903, 1904, and 1905. (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) I am not prepared to go to the very large extra expense which would be entailed by the preparation of a Return showing the number of assessments collected by the 31st of March in the years mentioned, but the hon. Member will, I think, obtain sufficient information for any purpose he has in view from the Return promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. Member for East Edinburgh.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a scheme has been outlined for the growth of sugar beet in the South of Ireland; and whether, seeing that foreign beet growers generally obtain 9 per cent. of saccharine matter and a tonnage of twelve per acre, whilst it has been proved that beet grown in county Cork showed 19 per cent, of saccharine and a tonnage of twenty per acre, in view of these circumstances he will recommend the Department of Agriculture to support the commencement of sugar beet growing in Ireland. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The Department are aware that a scheme has been formulated for the growth of sugar beet and the manufacture of sugar in the South of Ireland. They are informed that the percentage of sugar in beet and the yield per acre on the Continent are much in excess of the figures quoted for foreign sugar beet in the Question. Roots with as much as twenty-four per cent of sugar have been grown on the Continent; and in some districts in Germany the whole crop will average seventeen to twenty per cent. of sugar. For the reasons given in answer to previous Questions on this subject, the Department are not prepared to recommend the growing of sugar beet in Ireland.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the complaints of the decline in the supply of fish around the Irish coast due to the destruction or disturbance of the young fish in the breeding waters, and also to the incursion of steam trawlers within the prescribed limits and to the absence of any close season; and, if so, whether he will have inquiries instituted into this question. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) Complaints of the general decline of the supply of fish around the Irish coast have not been made, and would not, having regard to the quantities of fish landed, be justified. The question of trawling around the Irish coast has been most extensively dealt with, and at present there are about fifty by-laws in force restricting or prohibiting that mode of fishing in Irish bays and inshore waters. These by-laws are, on the whole, well observed. Breaches of their provisions have occasionally taken place, but since 1899 about fifty prosecutions have been instituted resulting, in most cases, in the infliction of substantial penalties. Although no actual close season has been fixed for any kind of sea fish, nevertheless certain regulations have in some instances been made which have the same effect as the establishment of a close time. If the decline of fish in any particular locality around the Irish coast be brought under the notice of the Department of Agriculture, an inquiry will be held if the circumstances are deemed to warrant it.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received copies of resolutions from the Irish Cattle Traders and Stock Owners Association and the Dublin Victuallers Association asking him to introduce a Bill to identify frozen meat imported into Ireland; and whether he will confer with the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture respecting this measure. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) A communication, dated March 27th, on the subject of the marking of imported meat has been received from the Irish Cattle Traders and Stock Owners Association, but no recent communication appears to have been received from the Dublin Victuallers Association on the subject. No promise can be given as to the introduction this session of legislation of the kind suggested.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the names of the nineteen evicted tenants in county Kerry restored to their farms since the passage of the Land Act, 1903; the estates on which they are situated; and whether their restoration is due to the action of the landlord or of the Estates Commissioners. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The appended list gives the information asked for. The evicted tenants were reinstated by the landlords.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland under what circumstances is the rule relaxed in Ireland which allows for the patrol duty to be carried out singly and not in couples. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The one-man day patrol system was extended to the country generally in June, 1904. In a few localities, however, two-men day patrols have been allowed owing to unrest in the neighbourhood or for other special reasons, such as the preservation of order on fair and market-days or the detection of particular offences.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies to what extent is the steamship subsidy of £40,000 per annum, which is given to the West Indies by England, applied for cheapening the cost of shipments of fruit to American ports. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) No subsidy is granted by this country to any steamer service between the West-Indian Colonies and the United States ports.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state why the 2nd West Yorks battalion, stationed at Belfast, was divided and sent to Newry for field training; for what reason has the Black Mountain training, near Belfast, been abolished; and what is the cost of the training ground at Newry. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Ireland, reports that this regiment was ordered to Newry owing to the absence of sufficient barrack accommodation at Belfast and difficulty of obtaining suitable ground for company training within reasonable distance of Belfast; that the Black Mountain is not suitable and is strictly preserved; and that nothing is paid at Newry for the ground, worked over.

To ask the Secretary of State for War why it was that the Committee appointed by the late Secretary of State to inquire into the grievances of the pensioned officers of the Reserve did not, as promised by the late Lord Hardwicke in the House of Lords, 11th May, 1901, inquire into the whole subject, and did not take evidence from the Reserve of officers; and whether, in view of the fact that his predecessor admitted the existence of a grievance under which the pensioned officers of the Reserve are suffering, and that under the terms of the Royal Warrant in force in 1899 junior officers of the Reserve who had retired with gratuities were more highly recompensed for their mobilised services than their pensioned seniors, he will say what steps he proposes to take to redress the alleged grievance resulting from this difference of treatment. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) There appears to be some misapprehension on the matter. The Committee in question was appointed to consider the terms on which retired officers are required to serve. This Committee had all necessary information before them, and reported that it would be quite impossible to make the proposals they recommended retrospective. In these circumstances it will be undertood that no further steps in the direction suggested in the Question are possible. I may also call the hon. Member's attention to a further statement by Lord Hardwicke on 7th August†, 1903, in which he corrected his previous statement and explained that the Committee found themselves unable "to recommend the idea of redressing the grievances of any particular officer."

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state the actual number of efficient seamen of twenty years of age obtained from each 1,000 lads entered at ordinary enrolling age; whether he can state the actual amount expended directly or indirectly on such 1,000 youths, including all expenditure on those who do not attain the age of twenty as able seamen, and can thus ascertain the total cost of each able seaman becoming fit for active service; and whether he has compared such cost with the expense incurred by the War Office in enrolling immature youths from civil life for the Army with the object of developing them into efficient soldiers.

The number of seamen of twenty years of age obtained from 1,000 entrants as boys is about 800. The total cost of a man to date of becoming A.B. is estimated at about £240. This figure includes cost of training, pay, victualling, and clothing, both for those who attain the rating of A.B. and those who do not. The Admiralty have no data which would enable any such comparison to be made as that suggested in the last part of the hon. Member's Question.

† See (4) Debates, cxxvii., 380.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any vessels of the Royal Navy are to be employed this season on the so-called French shore of Newfoundland; and, if so, whether they will be cruisers detached from the North American and West Indian Squadron, or whether they will be vessels specially commissioned for the purpose.

The reply to the first part of the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative. As regards the latter part of the Question, the vessels detailed for the duty referred to are not drawn from the North American and West Indian Squadron but are detached from other services.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what number of men have been enlisted during each month from October to April in 1897–8 and 1902–3.

The numbers, excluding Colonial enlistments, were as follows:—

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, with a view to induce Highlanders to join the Highland Light Infantry, he will consider the practicability of grouping the regiment with other Highland regiments with headquarters at Perth.

The Highland Light Infantry has been open for recruiting in all Scotland for more than three years, and therefore the suggested grouping with other Highland Regiments would not appear likely to affect the recruiting in any respect.

Is there not a difficulty in getting Highlanders to enlist?

I am informed that a large number of Highlanders do join in the Lowlands.

A few days ago the right hon. Gentleman said the majority were Lowlanders!

No, of the recruits obtained in the Lowlands the great majority are Highlanders.

; I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War when he proposes to proceed with the enlargement of the Royal Military College, Sandhurst.

I am not in a position at the present moment to say when it will be possible to proceed with the enlargement of the Royal Military College.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will inform the House how many infantry regulation boots were sold, by tender or otherwise, after the close of the South African War; in what quantities the lots were offered; and the average price obtained.

No infantry regulation boots have been sold from store by tender or otherwise since the close of the South African War. A certain number of boots, mostly part worn, whose owners could not be traced, were recovered in South Africa and sold.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the distress prevailing at Enfield through the postponement of the carrying out of the decision of the Army Council, he will consider the advisability, pending the decision of the Departmental Committee now sitting, of giving sufficient work to the Enfield factory to prevent any increase of distress.

Every effort will be made to prevent any increase of distress, but it is not possible to give work to Enfield beyond the money available for payment of wages. All the men are at present working short time, and the factory will continue to be closed on Saturday and Monday until the programme of manufacture for the year is definitely ascertained.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many Chinese coolies were concerned in the riot which took place at the North Randfontein Mine on April 1st; what was the cause of the disturbance; what were the casualties among the coolies and among the police; how many coolies were arrested; and, if their trial has already taken place, what sentences have been inflicted.

I have made inquiry but have not yet received a reply.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies when he expects that the new Constitution of the Transvaal will be promulgated; and whether, along with the Constitution, he will lay Papers and correspondence relating to its adjustment.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of yesterday† to the hon. Member for Poplar. I propose to lay, at the same time as the Letters Patent, such Papers as can be suitably given.

† See page 310.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will ascertain how many factories in India are at present engaged in the manufacture of war material, and the number of Europeans and natives respectively employed in these factories.

I informed the hon. Member on March 23rd† that there are at present eleven factories in India engaged in the manufacture of war material. I will inquire of the Government of India as to the number of Europeans and of natives employed in the factories.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state the number of convicted prisoners of foreign birth who have been received in His Majesty's prisons in Great Britain and Ireland during the year 1904.

The numbers are:—In England and Wales, 4,396; Scotland, 342; Ireland, 95; Total, 4,833. In reply to Mr. Keir Hardie's Question as to proportion of aliens to prisoners of the native population, Mr. Akers-Douglas said:—The number of convicted prisoners increased by 22 per cent. between 1899 and 1903. But the number of aliens among them increased during that period by 68 per cent.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many orders have been made by the London magistrates against parents whose children have been committed to industrial and truant schools during the last five years, and the amount of arrears still standing against such parents on the books of the department responsible for the collection of this money.

† See (4) Debates, cxliii., 939.

I regret that I am unable to give the figures for five years; but during the last three years the total number of orders made in the Metropolitan district against parents whose children have been committed to industrial and truant schools was 3,171. The amount of the parental contributions still outstanding in respect of these orders could not be given without a detailed examination of the books, which would involve very great labour. I can, however, give the total amount of parental contributions written off as irrecoverable during that period, which was £10,936: while the amount which was collected was £13,544. These two latter figures do not include the amounts collected and written off respectively by the London County Council in respect of cases at the Feltham Industrial School and at the three day industrial schools in London, viz., Drury Lane, Brunswick Road, and Penton Road.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in the case of a licence which, after objection by a member of the public, is reported to the compensation authority by the renewal authority as not required, he has yet taken any steps to secure that the objecting member of the public shall be heard by the compensation authority before that body comes to any decision as to whether the licence in question shall or shall not be renewed; and, if not, whether he will consider the desirability of immediately taking such steps, seeing that the preliminary meetings of compensation authorities are in some counties already being held.

No, Sir. It appears to me, that, under the procedure prescribed by the Licensing Rules, 1904, there is every opportunity for the proper consideration of the public requirements in the execution of the duty imposed on the compensation authority by the Act. I have nothing to add to my previous Answer.

said the whole point was that the licensing authority, before they could refuse a licence, must hear the licensee who is affected, but they may renew a licence without hearing the member of the public who has raised the objection. It is not at all the same thing.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Chancery Fund Annuities, amounting to £2,324,516 a year, and the Converted Annuities, amounting to £684,000 a year, expire in 1906; and if it is proposed to follow the precedent of 1884 by creating fresh annuities for the purpose of cancelling an equivalent capital amount of Consols.

The Annuities in question will expire in the course of next year. I cannot anticipate the arrangements to be made in future Budgets.

Is it not necessary for the Government to proceed by legislation previous to the time the annuities expire?

asked for notice of that Question.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can inform the House why Irish Land Stock, redeemable in 1921, is domiciled only at the Bank of Ireland, whereas the stock, redeemable in 1933, is domiciled at both London and Dublin, with the result that the earlier issue stands about two points below the later issue owing to its having a more restricted market.

Guaranteed Land Stock under the Purchase of Land Act, 1891, was issued by the Irish Land Commission direct to Irish landowners, and was most conveniently inscribed in the books of the Bank of Ireland. Guaranteed 2¾ per cent. stock under the Land Act, 1903, was issued for public subscription and inscribed partly at the Bank of England and partly at the Bank of Ireland. Any holder of the earlier stock who desires to have it inscribed in the Bank of England can effect the transfer by the procedure provided in the National Debt Act, 1870. I do not think the difference of price of the two stocks is owing to this cause, but to the fact that very little of the Guaranteed Land Stock ever comes into the market.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the telegraph staff at Hanley are frequently required to travel to Stoke to perform telegraph duties, a distance of two miles; that the practice has been to allow the men thirty minutes for the purpose of journey from office to office; and that the Department, as dating from 25th March, has declined to continue the custom; and, if so, whether, seeing that a duty of divided attendances is completed in two different towns, he will explain why the alteration has been made.

I am inquiring into the matter, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the dissatisfaction existing among the staff of the National Telephone Company as to the uncertainty of their position under the recent agreement with the company as regards their transfer to the Post Office service in the event of the purchase of the company's system in 1911; whether he has received any representations on the subject; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.

I am aware that some anxiety exists among the staff of the National Telephone Company, and I have received two memorials from different classes of the staff pointing out the difficulties of their position in view of the fact that the agreement for the purchase of the company's system imposes no definite obligation on the Government to offer them employment in the Post Office service after 1911, and asking that deputations may be received to make further representations on the subject. These memorials are receiving my careful consideration, and I hope to be able shortly to receive the proposed deputations. In the meantime I may, perhaps, say, without in any way pledging my successor, that, in view of the extent and nature of the business of the company to be taken over, I think it only reasonable to suppose that it may probably be found necessary to transfer to the Post Office service all efficient members of the executive staff previously required by the company for its proper performance. Those persons who are appointed to the established staff of the Post Office will at once benefit by the conditions as to pension which apply to that staff, but I cannot hold out any hope that operators and other classes who are not entitled to any pension under the conditions of their present employment in the company's service can be allowed to have the period of that service taken into account in reckoning their Post Office pensions. In the case of those members of the staff who contribute to the present pension fund, it is expressly stipulated in the agreement that any obligation arising out of their service previous to the transfer falls to be met by the company. It will be open to the Committee which will, I hope, soon be appointed to consider the agreement to hear representations of the company's staff, if they think it desirable to do so; but I ought to add that the agreement with the company has been signed, and cannot now be modified in any respect.

asked if the noble Lord would agree to the appointment of a special labour representative on the Committee so as to make sure that the interests of the employees were properly safeguarded?

No, Sir. The Committee has been nominated in the usual way. I had representations made to me as to placing certain representatives on it and I at once acceded to the request. I think the Committee will fairly represent all sections in the House.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is now in a position to make a statement in regard to the Australian mail contracts; and, in view of the inconvenience to Australian merchants and others, whether he will urge an early settlement of the question by the Australian Government.

The hon. Member will have seen, as I have, a statement in the Press that an arrangement has been arrived at between the Australian Government and the Orient Line for a fortnightly service. No confirmation of this contract has as yet reached either the Post Office or the Colonial Office, but I sincerely hope the report will turn out to be true.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he can see his way to reduce the present charges for telephone messages, eight shillings for three minutes conversation from London to Paris, to two shillings and sixpence for three minutes conversation over the same line; what is the estimated loss on such a reduction; and whether the line is now fully employed.

The charges for telephonic conversations between London and Paris are fixed by International agreement, and I do not feel able to propose any reduction. The service is necessarily a costly one, owing to the exceptional nature of the land lines and cables required, and the limited amount of traffic which each line will carry. At night conversations for six minutes at the charge of eight shillings are now allowed to regular subscribers, and this arrangement, which may work out at a good deal less than a farthing a word, has been found useful to journalists in both cities. I do not think the demand for conversations is restricted by the present charges, as the lines are fully employed during business hours. If the charge were reduced from eight shillings to two shillings and sixpence per conversation there would therefore, I think, be a proportionate reduction of revenue.

Is not a very large profit made at the present rate?

I do not know if it is large, but I believe there has been a profit.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a money order for 5s. obtained in a Paris post office and payable in London costs less than 1d. (10 centimes) for commission, whereas a Post Office money order from London to Paris for the same amount is charged 6d. commission; and whether he can see his way to make a reduction in this charge.

The hon. Member is under a misapprehension as to the commission charged in this country for the issue of a money order for 5s. payable in Paris. It would be 4d. only, as in the case of any money order for a sum not over £1 payable abroad. The rates of commission for such orders were reduced last year after exhaustive consideration; and I am not prepared to make further reductions.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that penny postage is in operation from this country to Malta and Aden; and whether he will open negotiations with the Egyptian authorities for the extension of the penny post to Egypt.

I am fully aware that the penny rate of postage applies to letters sent from this country to Malta and Aden. That rate was specially established as a means of facilitating postal communication within the British Empire; and Egypt is not in the same position as the Colonies and Protectorates included in the scheme.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that two halfpenny postage stamps in lieu of a penny stamp will not be received on the savings bank's forms for deposits up to a shilling, and if he will, for the convenience of children who are depositors, give instructions that halfpenny stamps may also be received in numbers not less than two.

Although the stamp deposit forms were intended to bear twelve penny stamps, it is not the practice to refuse them when stamps of other values are affixed in the proper spaces, provided the total value of the stamps on a form is one shilling.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can inform the House of the amount expended by each board of guardians in London out of the local rates for the relief of distress caused by lack of employment for the last four months.

I am not at present in a position to give this information, but I will see what particulars of the kind desired can be furnished in connection with other information which I propose to obtain with reference to the relief of distress during the past winter.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to present any Report on the work of the Unemployed Committee?

I understand that a Report is being drawn up by the Committee, and when I have seen it I will consider whether it shall be laid on the Table.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the advisability of placing a limit upon the borrowing powers of municipalities.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer has asked me to reply to this Question. I am afraid that I could not undertake to propose legislation with the object which my hon. friend has in view; but I may mention that the greater part of the loans raised under the general law by the councils of municipal boroughs and urban and rural districts are raised under the Public Health Acts, and that these Acts place a limit on the borrowing powers which they confer on local authorities.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been drawn to experiments which have been carried on in America with a view to the propagation and use upon the land of nitrogen-producing bacteria; whether he is aware that certain rights relating to the method of preparation of these bacteria are the property of the United States Government, and that that Government is distributing packets of these bacteria free of charge to any farmers who apply for them, and that the result of such distribution has been beneficial for farming; and, if so, can he say whether any rights relating to the preparation of these nitrogen-producing bacteria would prevent His Majesty's Government from adopting a similar course; and, if not, whether he is prepared to recommend that a similar free distribution be adopted in this country.

Yes, my attention has been directed to the interesting experiments to which my hon. friend refers, and we have published some articles on the subject in our monthly journal, with copies of which I shall be happy to supply him. Experiments as to the value of nitrogen-producing bacteria are now being carried out under our auspices by several of the agricultural colleges in this country, and so soon as the results are known we shall consider what further action in the matter can be taken in the interest of British agriculturists. I understand that the process of producing and cultivating the bacteria has been patented by the United States Department of Agriculture, but I gather that the Department do not propose indefinitely to continue its gratuitous distribution. There appears to be nothing to prevent the manufacture and sale of the material in this country.

Will the benefit of the experiments extend to Ireland?

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he is aware of the difficulty Members of this House frequently find in procuring seats in the smoking-room; and whether he could see his way to recommend some improvement in the accommodation now provided.

The First Commissioner is quite aware of the limited accommodation at the House for hon. Members wishing to smoke, and much regrets that more space is not available. Additional chairs have lately been provided; but there seems no way at present of finding extra room.

Will the noble Lord represent to the First Commissioner the desirability of utilising one of the rooms of the Library?

I do not think the First Commissioner would accede to that suggestion.

Why not take one of the rooms from the House of Lords which are not used at all?

Those rooms do not come within the province of the First Commissioner.

I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate whether he is aware that the Board of Admiralty are now offering for sale obsolete war vessels; and will he consider the desirability of securing one or more such vessels for sea police duties in the Moray Firth and on the seaboard of the Western Highlands and Islands of Scotland.

The Secretary for Scotland does not think that obsolete war vessels could be either competently or economically employed in the service referred to by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate, seeing that, the Prime Minister has expressed the opinion that more funds are desirable and could be usefully employed for the purposes of the Congested Districts Board (Scotland), will he arrange to confer with Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer with a view to secure the allocation of additional funds.

The Secretary for Scotland does not propose at present to apply to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for additional funds for the purposes referred to by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will furnish a Return showing, with dates, the names and positions of any officers who have received payments out of the Endowment Fund of the Irish Agricultural Department since its inception, stating in each case the reasons for such payment.

This information will be collected and communicated to the hon. Member; but, for the reason stated yesterday†, I do not propose to lay the Return on the Table of the House.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant

† See page 319.

The Commissioners are negotiating for the purchase of about 300 acres of untenanted land in the county.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what is the cause of delay in putting the Iveagh-Pirrie motor scheme into operation at Clonaslee, Queen's County, the inhabitants having petitioned in favour of its adoption in the district.

This Question is one entirely for the promoters of the scheme. I have no information on the subject.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Sergeant Fitzsimons is candidate for the position of petty sessions clerk at Mountmellick; and whether it is in accord with the Police Code and the rules an dregulations of the Royal Irish Constabulary that a member of the force should canvass magistrates for their votes in connection with an appointment not yet declared vacant.

Sergeant Fitzsimons is not a candidate for this appointment, and has not canvassed the magistrates for it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, as Section 6, 14 and 15 Vic. (1851), prescribes that upon the suspension of any clerk of petty sessions the sub-inspector of constabulary or the head constable of the district shall take charge of the books and papers, he will state why Sergeant Fitzsimons was appointed to substitute the petty sessions clerk of Mountmellick who has been suspended.

The section provides that either of the officers mentioned "or such other person as the Justices shall authorise" shall take over the books, etc., on the suspension of the clerk. Sergeant Fitzsimons was duly authorised by the Justices under that provision.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Secretary to the Irish National Education Board has written to a teacher stating that, under the operation of the new rule 127 (b), the teacher's salary may be reduced from £140 to £56 per annum; whether there is any other branch of the public service in which, when reforms are being effected, the men who have spent their lives in the service are so sacrificed; and whether, in the working of this rule, steps will be taken to insure that no teacher at present in the service will be injuriously affected.

The manager of the Aughrim Boys' and Girls' National Schools was informed on the 21st March that if the average attendance at the boys' school fell below thirty-five the salary of the principal teacher would be reduced from £130 to £116 per annum, and that if the average fell below twenty it would be reduced to £56 per annum; but he was told at the same time that rule 127 (b) applied only to future enrolments, and it was suggested that the best course to adopt would be to amalgamate the boys' and girls' schools, making the master the principal of the combined school. If this were done the salary of the master would not be reduced, but, on the contrary, would be increased, and he would become eligible for promotion to the highest grade of teachers, as the average attendance at the combined school would be over seventy. The salary of the mistress would remain, as at present, under special Treasury sanction. I may add that I will take the earliest opportunity of thoroughly investigating this matter, and I would ask hon. Members to be good enough to defer any further Questions on the subject until after the Easter recess.

Is it not the fact that 160,000 children under eight years of age will be transferred under this rule, and that the Treasury will thus effect a saving of £75,000 yearly.

The duty of the Treasury is to see that the public money is properly spent without injustice either to the public or to the employed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received resolutions from the Mayo County Council and the Mayo District Asylum pointing out the inconvenience and expense that would be involved in putting the new Public Bodies Order into practice, and the unworkable character of many of its provisions, especially in regard to district asylums; and whether, in view of the fact that the Orders now in force, which were devised by the Local Government Board itself, have given satisfaction generally, the new Order will be withdrawn.

The resolution of the county council merely asked permission to adopt a special form of book, and this application will receive consideration. The resolution of the district asylum committee was to the effect stated, but the Board pointed out in reply that no changes had been made in the system of asylum accounts which were not rendered necessary by recent legislation or were not suggested by experience. It is not intended to withdraw the Order.

On behalf of the hon. Member for East Mayo, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland why the men whose names have been sent in to the Local Government Board from the parish of Killasser, Union of Swinford, have not yet been put on relief works.

The Board have authorised the employment of the representatives of sixty-five families in this parish.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the manager of the national schools in Kilmeedy, county Limerick, applied to the Board of National Education in Ireland for a grant-in-aid to build new schools there, which was promised in December, 1903; that subsequently, in 1904, the Board made it a condition that the boys under eight years of age attending the schools must be sent to the girls' school, and that, in the event of the average daily attendance in the boys' school not warranting the appointment of an assistant, the boys' and girls' schools should be amalgamated, to which conditions the manager refused to comply; if he can state what was the reason for insisting on these conditions after the promise to give the grant-in-aid had been made; what was the character of the inspector's report of the present schools for three years previous to the application for the grant-in-aid; whether, between that time and the date on which the aforesaid conditions were made for the obtaining of the grant, did any change for the worse take place in the character of the schools; and whether he will take steps to remove these conditions to enable the schools to be built,

The manager applied for a building grant, but no premise to accede to it was made by the Commissioners. He was informed that, in the event of his application being favourably entertained, the infant boys should be sent to the girls' school; and, further, that it was expected that he would amalgamate the boys' and girls' schools if the average attendance of boys did not warrant, within a reasonable time, the appointment of an assistant teacher. The character of the inspector's report on the instruction imparted in these schools for the three years previous to the receipt of the application for a building grant was satisfactory, and no falling off in the efficiency of the teachers has since been reported.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state whether, if the conditions required by the Board of National Education in Ireland for obtaining; a grant-in-aid for the building of the Kilmeedy National Schools were complied with by the manager and the male and female schools amalgamated, in the event of the boys' school not warranting the appointment of an assistant, would the principal teacher of the female school be reduced to the position of assistant; and what effect would that have on her present position as teacher.

If the conditions referred to were complied with and the male and female schools were amalgamated, the principal teacher of the female school would be reduced to the position of assistant teacher; but, under special regulations sanctioned by the Treasury, she would retain her present grade salary.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, under the Act amalgamating the Waterford and Limerick Railway with the Great Southern and Western Railway Company, the latter were bound to give facilities to the public equal to those enjoyed by them previous to the amalgamation, and that, since the amalgamation, the rate per ton for tea from London to Rathkeale, viâ Waterford, has been raised from 44s. 10d. per ton to 53s. 4d. per ton, or 8s. 6d. per ton more; and whether he will take steps to see that the terms of the Act in this respect are carried out.

The Act provides that the actual rates charged on 30th June, 1900, shall not be increased without the consent of the Railway and Canal Commissioners. The Department are not aware of any instance, in which this provision has been contravened.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire if the facts stated in the Question are not correct?

Certainly but if they are it seems to me that the people aggrieved have the power of appeal open to them. If they prefer, however, to open communications through the Government I will consider it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that upon the hearing of two claims by farmers for compensation for malicious destruction of hay, at Limerick Quarter Sessions last week, Head-Constable Doherty expressed the opinion that the hay was burned on behalf of the applicant, whereas County Court Judge Adams rejected that opinion, which he said was unsupported by any tittle of evidence, and awarded the claimant compensation; and whether, with the view of preserving the independence of the Constabulary, he will direct a full inquiry to be made into the circumstances under which the police officer made these unfounded allegations.

The reports that I have received in this matter are not sufficient to enable me to reply to my hon. friend's Question to-day, and I would ask him to defer it until Monday next.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state why the solicitors acting for Lord Charles Beresford refused to allow the construction of the proposed Moher relief of distress road in county Cavan.

The reason given by the solicitors was that the consent of their client to the construction of the road had not been obtained, and that the road would only benefit a few people. In reply to a further Question by Mr. VINCENT KENNEDY—

said the consent of the landlord was very properly required before these works could be undertaken. The relief of distress had been dealt with with great liberality.

Will you make representations to Lord Charles Beresford on the subject?

been made direct.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can say how long have the negotiations between himself and the railway companies in reference to the proposed change in the mail between Belfast and London already taken; and when he thinks they will be completed.

I have for some time past been in communication with the railway companies respecting an improvement in the mail service from Belfast to England, but I am afraid I cannot say when a decision will be arrived at. I should perhaps explain that I am endeavouring to arrange for a later despatch of the present mail by the Larne and Stranraer route, as the improvement which could thus be effected would be more general than that to be gained by the establishment of a new service viâ Greenore. As the hon. Member is aware, several companies are concerned in the service by this route, and more time is therefore occupied in the negotiations.

How long have the communications been going on?

Since November last year.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the majority of the House in favour of the Second Reading of the Local Authorities (Qualification of Women) Bill on Friday last, he will give facilities for the further progress of the measure this session.

I am afraid I cannot hold out any hope of special facilities. As the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, it is not usual to promise them to private Members except in the case of non-contentious Bills, and these cases are exceedingly rare.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can now state the date of the introduction of the Aliens Bill.

I think I can promise that this Bill will be introduced the week after next, at all events I see no obstacle at present in its way.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that candidates for the public service are not allowed to take up appointments unless they have been vaccinated; and, seeing that this regulation penalises candidates who object to vaccination, will he so amend the regulations as to make it competent for such persons to secure their appointments. I hope the Question is now in the understanding of the right hon. Gentleman.

Oh, yes, Sir; I have always understood the hon. Gentleman's Questions on this subject, but I have had some doubts as to whether he always understood my Answers. All I can say in reply to the hon. Geatleman's Question is that, in the opinion of the authorities, vaccination is a surgical or medical operation which ought to be performed. Until that decision is reversed, I do not see any reason for altering the rule which at present exists in the Civil Service.

Then will the right hon. Gentleman induce the Local Government Board to see that a supply of pure glycerinated calf lymph is afforded to every medical man?

I believe that is being done.

It is not.

At any rate, the supply of pure vaccine lymph is quite sufficient for the Civil Service.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, seeing that the Congested Districts (Scotland) Amendment Bill is supported by all Highland Members, will he make arrangements with a view to secure its Second Reading before Easter.

I am afraid that I cannot find the time asked for.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Mr. Gerald Loder, the newly appointed Junior Lord of the Treasury, who is a director of four companies, of which one is the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company, and another the Standard Bank of South Africa, will retain these directorships or any, and, if so, which of them in conjunction with his position of a Minister of the Crown in the Finance Department of the Government; and, if so, on what grounds can the retention of these directorships, or any of them, by Mr. Gerald Loder be justified.

I think the hon. Gentleman asked substantially the same Question on a previous occasion. I do not think I have anything to add to the Answer I then gave.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say "yes" or "no" to my Question.

I must say when I read the Question on the Paper this morning it appeared to me to be the same Question as was pat yesterday.

No, Sir, it is not the same Question.

Will the hon. Member point out the difference.

In the former Question I asked about four directorships In this I refer to two specific ones, the holding of which I contend is not consistent with his position.

The four included the two. The Question, is the same as the previous one, but if the hon. Gentleman thinks there is something in it, not covered by the Answer, he had better frame another and more specific Question.

Yes, Sir, I will.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that the Sale of Butter Bill has been discussed during the last two sessions of Parliament, he will take the Second Reading of it an an early day, with the view of having it passed into law this session.

Although I cannot name a day for the Second Reading, I hope the Bill will be passed this session.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to have the Second Reading before Easter?

I can make no promise.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will give facilities, this session, to pass the Early Closing (Saturday) Intoxicating Drinks (Ireland) Bill.

I must ask the hon. Gentleman to accept as an Answer to this Question the reply I have just given to the hon. Member for Devonport.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the Departmental Committee upon the Sparkbrook and Enfield Small Arms Factories is likely to report.

There was no Departmental Committee on these factories, but there was an Inter-Departmental Committee on a larger question with which the factories are connected. I cannot promise any day for their Report.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the Report of the Royal Commission now sitting on Church Disorders will be issued.

A similar Question was addressed to me on 21st February†. The Committee will report, I believe, in the course of the year, but I have no power either to retard or hasten their deliberations.

I desire to ask the First Lord of the Treasury a Question as to which I have communicated with him privately—whether his attention has been called to the statement made last night by the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury, in reply to a Question put by an hon. Member on this side of the House as to the Retaliation Resolution passed by the House last week, that he had communicated to the Prime Minister what passed, and whether the right hon. Gentleman wishes in any way to, modify or withdraw the statement he made in the House last week that the sole knowledge he had of that Resolution was derived from the Question put to him by the hon. Member for Oldham on the subject.

I have asked my right hon. friend the Patronage Secretary what passed last night, and I think the hon. Gentleman opposite may be under some misapprehension. The Question of the hon. Member for Oldham related to the terms of the Resolution and what passed in regard to it. [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] I was not acquainted with its terms, and my right hon. friend did not inform me of its terms. He was not himself aware of the fact that the Resolution was passed nemine contradicente, and therefore he could not give me information which was not in his possession. He did tell

† See (4) Debates, cxli., 780.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he still adheres to his statement that his sole knowledge as to what appeared to have taken place was derived from the Question of the hon. Member for Oldham?

It was the sole knowledge relative to the Question of the hon. Member for Oldham. I have told the House what my right hon. friend the Patronage Secretary did give me information about. If the House thinks that that was relative to the Question of the hon. Member, then I misled the House; but I do not think it was relative to it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman live up in a balloon?

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us, as he says he did not know the terms of the Resolution, whether it is not his habit to read the Order-book of the House?

I did not know the terms of the Resolution, because there was really no reason why I should make myself acquainted with them.

There was.

There was not. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman, if he had been Leader of the House, would have made himself acquainted with them. I did what I thought was necessary in the circumstances in which I was placed. And what were those circumstances? They were these, that I had explained, at great length, to the House that in my judgment these continued Motions on one question brought our proceeding into some ridicule and that I meant to have no more to do with them. That being the case, what was there blameworthy in my conduct?

If I may venture to say so, I will not trouble the right hon. Gentleman with any further Question, being quite satisfied with things as they stand.

reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from serving on the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures, in respect of the Coal Mines (Weighing of Minerals) Bill: Sir Charles Dilke; and had appointed in substitution: Sir Thomas Roe.

further reported; That they had discharged the following Member from serving on the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures;— Mr. Tennant; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Herbert Samuel.

said he felt bound to offer opposition to the Motion, and he would like to point out that no reasons whatever had been advanced for that infraction, as he might call it, of the Standing Orders of the House. Nothing had been alleged to warrant the Motion which the right hon. Gentleman had just made, neither had he told them for what purpose the Order was required or whether there was any Bill of such a pressing character which rendered it desirable or necessary to pass it. He would like the House to bear in mind that they were now living under the Standing Orders of 1902, which seriously curtailed the opportunities of private Members, and which enabled the Government to monopolise nearly the whole of the time of the House. It has been calculated that last session the Government took no less than seven-eighths of the time of the House, leaving only the remaining eighth for private Members, and now they were proposing a Rule which would still further limit the opportunities of private Members. Again, it should not be forgotten that the House agreed to meet at two o'clock—an early hour and extremely inconvenient to many Members—on the condition that as a rule they should not be kept in the House after midnight. He therefore looked upon this proposal which would keep Members after twelve o'clock as an infraction of the contract under which their proceedings were now governed, and he did think that before they passed such a Resolution some reasons should be advanced in support of it. Under the Standing Orders the Twelve O'clock Rule could be suspended only for business which came within four categories, namely, Bills which originated in Committee of Ways and Means, proceedings in pursuance of Acts of Parliament, proceedings in pursuance of Standing Orders, and proceedings excepted by special Motion made by a Minister of the Crown. Again, there was a provision rendering it necessary that a Bill so dealt with should be under consideration at the time of the interruption of business, but this it was now proposed to do away with by a Sessional Order, and he ventured to suggest it constituted a very strong departure from the spirit of the original agreement. When the Standing Orders of 1902 were introduced they were led to believe in their finality, but, as a matter of fact, there was no finality, and both last year and the year before a similar Motion to this was made which further restricted the rights of the House, further interfered with the convenience of Members, and at the same time considerably enlarged the powers of the Government. The Prime Minister had given the House to understand that he did not intend to stay after midnight, and if he went a large number of Members would naturally follow his example, with the result that these important questions would be discussed in a depleted House. He would like to ask one or two Questions. Why was this Resolution required? What sort of Bills was it intended to refer to? Was it intended to facilitate the further creation of irregular debt which was concerned with public works? If so, then he thought that the House should strongly resist it. He wished to put the matter as strongly as possible, and he complained, first, that no reason was given for this Motion; secondly, that, if there was a reason, the objects or nature of the Bills to come under it should be specified; and thirdly, his suggestion was that the proposal constituted a very serious infraction of the bargain made with the House when the Standing Orders of 1902 were passed. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would, before the debate closed, give them some explanations on those points.

said he certainly thought that the House was bound to make a protest not only against the Resolution, but against the way in which it had been proposed. The right hon. Gentleman had moved it simply by a nod of his head as if it were a mere matter of course. But it was nothing of the kind; and the right hon. Gentleman, having spent so much time in the year 1902 on a brand-new set of Standing Orders, certainly ought now, when he was proposing, without explanation and without any justification whatever, a new Sessional Order, to be called upon to state his reasons. Before a vote was taken he ought to tell them for what particular business it was desired to suspend the Twelve O'clock Rule. This was a Sessional Order which would entirely override the new Standing Orders parsed after so much discussion only two years ago. In 1903 this Sessional Order was Carried by a majority, but in opposition to the wishes of a very considerable minority. In 1904 it was again proposed, but it was unanimously rejected by the House of Commons, and, therefore he did not think the right hon. Gentleman was in a position to quote any precedent for his present proposal. One of the chief arguments raised in the House in support of the Twelve O'clock Rule was that it would prevent Supply and other financial business coming on after midnight, and it certainly had been a perfect scandal that business of that nature should be dealt with in the early hours of the morning when the House was depleted, when proper discussion could not take place, and when there was no probability of the proceedings being reported. Now the right hon. Gentleman was proposing, almost at the beginning of the session, a Sessional Order which would operate for the whole session, and which would enable him to take very important business after midnight. He was making this proposal without a single word of explanation, and hon. Members who wished to safeguard the rights of private Members, especially in regard to the discussion of financial matters, should most vigorously protest against this proceeding. He would not, indeed, be surprised if the Motion were defeated as last year, but whatever its fate, he hoped that the hon. Member for King's Lynn, who had done most valuable service in the past in protecting the rights of disscussion in that House, especially on financial matters, would receive the support which he deserved.

said he hoped there would be no opposition to the passing of the Order, which he was sure was for the convenience not merely of the present or of future Governments, but of the House itself. It was perfectly true he did not introduce the Resolution, by any statement of reasons, and why did he not do so? The right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had referred to it as if it had never been, heard of before, and he had not dealt with its antecedent history.

I said it was passed in 1903 and was again brought forward last year and defeated.

said that the right hon. Gentleman certainly had carried the history back to 1903, but the Resolution was one which in substance, and even in terms, had been passed, he believed, without any discussion, debate, or objection by different Administrations over a long period of years.

We are now under new rules.

said it was perfectly true that new rules had been brought in and they were not yet finished. They were never intended to be a complete settlement of the regulations regarding the business of the House for all time. He was not asking the House to make this a Standing Order, because that would necessarily involve a longer debate. He would like to point out that this Order differed from its predecessors in one important respect. Under its old form Reports of Supply were taken away from the operation of the Twelve O'clock Rule, but now Reports of Supply were left under it. It would be in the memory and experience of many hon. Members how Reports of Supply had had to be dealt with in the small hours of the morning, but now the greater part of the financial business of the House was altogether outside the purview of this Sessional Order. The Budget Bill was exempted from the Twelve O'clock Rule, but most of the financial business, and especially Reports of Supply, was not touched by it.

No, but then you have automatic closure for Reports of Supply.

, in conclusion, said he was sure that all sections of the House would desire that this Sessional Order should be passed. It would not be to the advantage of either one Party or the other, bus it would be for the convenience of the whole House, and, under the circumstances, he trusted that they would not further occupy time which it was desired to allocate for the discussion of other business.

said the Prime Minister had not answered a single one of the Questions put by the hon. Member for King' Lynn. Everything depended on the Bills involving money which the Government intended to introduce during this session. Undoubtedly, some important Money Bills were to be introduced. They had had it from the Government that it would be necessary to have a Military Works Bill, and a Naval Works Bill this session, and it was within their memory that these Bills were usually introduced very late in the session, and that the most important portion of the discussion on them always took place on the Report of the Resolution on which they were founded. Now, this Sessional Order would enable that step to be entered upon after midnight, and he thought that would seriously militate against the proper consideration of these questions. Those Bills were, after all, kind of supplementary military and naval budgets, and it was most important that the House should have full and ample opportunity of discussing the financial bearing of the Bills at a reasonable hour of the evening. He, therefore, hoped that the Prime Minister would be able to exempt from the operation of this Sessional Order those important subjects.

asked if the Prime Minister would state what Bills he intended to deal with under this rule. He presumed they would be the Consolidated Fund Bill, the Appropriation Bill, the Naval Works Bill, and the Military Works Bill.

said that the Resolution would undoubtedly apply to all four of those Bills, and he did not think there was anything wrong in that. He would like to point out that there were very full and ample opportunities of discussing the Military and Naval Works Loans Bills on their various stages. In his opinion the Motion was in the interests of public business, and was for the convenience of hon. Members.

said it was quite clear that the number of measures affected by the passing of this Resolution would be unusually large this year.

I do not think so.

said three more Bill would be affected than last year. There would be the extra Consolidated Fund Bill—and in passing he should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman when he proposed to introduce it—and there would be the Loan Bills for Naval and Military Works. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that there were full opportunities of discussing Bills founded upon Resolutions in the Committee of Ways and Means, but he would remind the House that in the discussion of all Bills founded on such Resolutions, they had found themselves at every subsequent stage hampered and tied by the terms of the Resolution itself. In view of that he thought it was desirable that there should be an opportunity for discussion before midnight.

It does not touch the Committee stage of the Resolutions at all.

said it touched the Report stage, which was equally important. This was another illustration of the policy of the right hon. Gentleman in treating all financial Bills as mere formalities. If the Report stage were unimportant let it be cut away altogether, but if they were going to maintain the rights of the House let them maintain them to their full extent.

said that not one of the Questions put to the Prime Minister in regard to the Motion had been satisfactorily answered by the right hon. Gentleman, and if he had exhausted his right of speech in that debate it was to be hoped that the Secretary to the Treasury would be put up to give further explanations. He would like, in the first place, to ask how it was that last year they got through so well after defeating unanimously a Resolution of this kind. Did not that experience show that the Resolution was quite unnecessary? Then, again, why had it been put down for that day Was there some reason in regard to the discussions on the War Office Votes which rendered it necessary that it should be taken that afternoon? Thirdly, he would like to know why the Resolution was so widely drawn. The Resolution was much too widely drawn. The House was willing to give all necessary facilities for specific business, and not one of the hon. Members who had spoken on that point but had admitted in principle that it might be necessary with regard to some of their business to take some step of this kind. But this Resolution would include anything. It would include a new transaction like the Cunard Agreement that they had a year or two ago, and was rather too widely drawn to receive the assent of the House. This Resolution was a bad example of the hustling of money business which the Prime Minister had adopted on every occasion. All discussion of money business had either been greatly abridged or entirely destroyed, and he thought the House ought to draw the line. This would, he considered, be a very good occasion upon which to do it, and he asked the Prime Minister to withdraw this Resolution altogether and bring in one in more moderate terms.

said he begged to offer his humble protest against any proposal—especially one of this kind—which violated the sanctity of the Twelve O'clock Rule, When the new rules under which they met at two o'clock were submitted to the House, the strong argument of the Prime Minister was that they would be able to get away at twelve o'clock, and they would know if they were going to be kept late. At the time, some of them expressed the opinion that the old system would go on, and that they would never be sure when the business of the House was going to end. If hon. Members looked at the Business Paper it was practically impossible to say when they could get away at twelve o'clock at night, and here they had the Prime Minister actually recommending this proposal to the House because certain Bills could not be commenced until after twelve o'clock at night—a most preposterous suggestion. He thought they had a right to complain that in every possible way, and session after session, raids were being made upon the time of the House and upon the time of hon. Members. Were hon. Members on the other side aware that they were supporting a Resolution which would be taken full advantage of, probably before many sessions were over. What would hon. Members do then? Would they support the Government of the day? As far as he was concerned, he should, even if he was alone, vote against any proposal that the House should sit after twelve o'clock at night. His experience was that sitting after twelve o'clock was not good for the temper of the House, nor was it good for public business, and he ventured to say that no Leader of the House, who gave an impartial opinion, would be inclined to support late sittings. There was no reason why they should, without any notice at all, be called upon to sit after twelve o'clock of Supply after twelve o'clock. At night on any occasion when the Patronage Secretaty or the First Lord of the Treasuy decreed the they should do so It was the uncertainty against which he protested, because it necessitated hon. Members going to the trouble of inquiring whether or not the Government were going to take the Report stage of a money Bill. He was surprised at the light-heartedness with which the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister talked of the Report stage, which had always been regarded as being equal in importance to the Committee stage. In the first place it was the reconsideration by the House of the proposals before the committee, and in the second place, it gave hon. Members an opportunity of replying to the case which was put forward by the Minister. It would be a very bad day for the House when the Report stage was looked upon as merely a mechanical matter and as being of no importance at all. The right hon. Gentleman said it did not apply to Supply, but would he undertake that at a later period of the session he would not include Supply in a similar Motion.