§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ [Mr. JEFFREYS (Hampshire, N.) in the Chair.]
§ Clause 1.
§ *MR. GARDNER (Berkshire, Wokingham)
said that the object of the Amendment he desired to move was to make it easier for local authorities, who had a heavy burden cast upon them by the Education Act of last year, to bring that Act into working order. There was no disguising the fact that the financial conditions in connection with the bringing into operation of that Act were very unpopular and somewhat burdensome. The right hon. Member for Somersetshire had complained at the Second Reading of the Bill that to bring the Act into operation in his county would add 4d. in the £ to the rates. His county, might he say, was in the lap of luxury compared with the principal borough in his constituency. That borough had carried on its educational affairs for years in an excellent manner. It had never had other than voluntary schools, Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Church of England, and British, and all the buildings, 38 with one exception, were first-class. The inhabitants naturally asked why they should have been disturbed in their educational proceedings? The answer to that question was that they were being treated in the same manner as all other boroughs. It nevertheless seemed to them very hard indeed that this burden should be placed upon them. The financial year of all their schools ended on 31st March, and the result of the first year's working of the new Education Act was that they had not got a single sixpence of the block grant and only three-fourths of the fee grant; and, left without assistance, they would have to raise a rate of 9d. in the £ over the normal one to carry on the work. What they wanted was that the Government should do something to enable them to tide over the difficulty in the easiest way. The Bill before the Committee would only enable the Local Government Board to sanction a loan for a definite amount for a definite time; but the borough could do its work a great deal cheaper than that. In the early part of the year there were considerable funds in the hands of the education authority and they could get on well enough for four or five months. But as he understood the section of the Bill they must take up the loan—which in the case of the borough he referred to would amount to something approaching £3,000—at once and pay interest on it for the whole year. As hon. Members knew municipal authorities had various accounts and by arrangement with their bankers these were taken en bloc, and no charge for interest was made for an overdraft on one should others be in sufficient credit. In that case it was quite conceivable no interest might be charged to an education authority, and a saving might be effected in his borough of from £500 to £600 over the whole term of borrowing. His Amendment to the first clause of the Bill would, he believed, make the working of the Education Act as easy as possible in the circumstances, and he hoped it would be accepted by the Government on the grounds both of policy and justice. He begged to move.
In page 1, line 7, after '1902,' to insert the words 'or in such other manner as that Board may approve.'"—(Mr. Gardner.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,) Bristol, S.
said he could not help thinking that his hon. friend had moved his Amendment under a misapprehension. In the first, place he had stated on behalf of the local authority he represented, that they would be compelled to take up the whole of the loan at once and consequently would have to pay interest upon it, though they would not require all the money for immediate purposes. His hon. friend was in error. It would only be necessary for the local education authority to take up the loan in such proportion as they required the money for expenditure. If the estimate of the deficit in the borough referred to was £3,000 it would not be necessary for the authority to raise that sum all at once. They could make application as they thought fit for various parts of the loan as they needed them. This would avoid the difficulty to which his hon. friend referred. The other contention of his hon. friend was that the local authority, having various accounts at the bank, some of which were in credit, might be able to borrow the money from the bank without paying any interest on the overdraft. There was nothing to prevent that under the Bill as it stood. They were prepared to make the work of the local authority as easy as they could. He was ready to grant reasonable and fair terms and to consider applications for loans, but the cardinal principle was that of a distinct loan for a definite purpose under the ordinary law, and to adopt the principle of legalising overdrafts was a very unwise step to take. He hoped, therefore, that the Amendment would not be pressed.
§ SIR ALBERT ROLLIT (Islington, S)
said there was a very strong feeling among the boroughs with regard to this question, and as they had supported the principle of making the best of the 40 Bill and the most of the Act, any representations coming from them were entitled to very great respect. The fact of having to make a rate was based upon very sound principles. Financially his hon. friend might say there could be no objection to it, but educationally it would be most prejudicial. It would create prejudice against the operation of the Act, and would have a tendency to alienate the sympathy and interest of the people of the locality in putting the Act into operation. The only effective remedy against borrowing would be the possibility of a surcharge. If a surcharge was the penalty the process of borrowing was open to objection on principle. He thought his right hon. friend rightly asked in this case, which was an exceptional one, that there should be elasticity given to avoid the necessity of laying a rate in the first instance. He thought there was ample protection in the Bill. Having regard to the prejudice which might arise against education owing to a temporary want of means, he thought that borrowing legitimately by a provision in this statute for a temporary purpose, would be amply justified. He supported the feeling expressed by the boroughs.
§ MR. J. A. PEASE (Essex, Saffron Walden)
said that in his constituency there was a School Board which had a large balance in hand raised from the rates in an agricultural district, and naturally they very much objected to being rated by a precept when they already had a balance in hand. What redress had those ratepayers? He wished to know whether, in the event of this Amendment being carried, the borrowing powers could be limited to the area of the county.
§ MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE (Somersetshire, E.)
said the School Board parish would get the benefit of any balance when the next rate came to be levied, parishes which had funds in hand would be dealt with by the County Councils. He had heard his right hon. friend's answer with some surprise. He understood from the answer given to the County Councils Association that the Government were willing to assist the County Councils in any reasonable way, and among those 41 reasonable ways was that they might be permitted to overdraw their accounts. He could not see why the Local Government Board should throw any obstacle in the way, because his right hon. friend must remember that this position was created by the Government, and therefore they were entitled to all possible consideration, especially remembering the fact that they had to levy an extra rate in consequence. Surely it was not unreasonable that during the last few months of the last financial year they should be allowed to overdraw their accounts when necessary. Under the circumstances, it would be only reasonable for the Local Government Board to sanction this; otherwise they would be at the mercy of the auditors.
§ MR. BRIGG (Yorkshire, W. R., Keighley)
said he wished to impress upon the right hon. Gentleman the necessity of behaving as well as possible under the circumstances. The circumstances in one case he knew of were, that the County Council was called upon to raise £7,000 for extra expenses incurred under this Act. The County Council had done its best, but it now found itself face to face with the possibility of having to find the money immediately; it would only be reasonable, in granting a loan, that the right hon. Gentleman should do his very best to make the terms as easy as possible for the County Council to obtain the money. Of course they would have to borrow the money by degrees, and they should have as much time as possible given to them to make the payments easy. The money should be provided by the Government at once. He thought the right hon. Gentleman would act wisely if he would grant time, and give County Councils an opportunity of obtaining the money in the most reasonable way.
§ SIR JOHN GORST (Cambridge University)
pointed out that the necessity for raising these sums arose from the way the schools had been treated. Instead of finding them capital, the managers had had to find the money, and would not receive any assistance until the year was over; therefore they would have to wait for their money for a considerable time. The maxim of the right hon. Gentleman was a very sound one, and he agreed that the local authorities ought 42 not to be encouraged to overdraw their banking accounts. This, however, was a very special case, and the local authority had no business to throw upon a subsequent year the cost of services rendered in the existing year. That was a reasonable principle, but in this case the expenditure was entirely unexpected, and it was not for the benefit of the ratepayers of the present year, but had to be spread over a number of years. Therefore, in a case of that kind, it seemed to him that the simple method of allowing the local authorities to overdraw their accounts would be quite sufficient means of enabling them to meet this unexpected and extraordinary expenditure, and he should be very glad if the President of the Local Government Board would consider the advisability of accepting the Amendment.
§ MR. YOXALL (Nottingham, W.)
said it was most unwise to apply the strict rules of finance to matters of this kind. What the counties wanted was not so much a funded debt as a floating debt. But a floating debt was not the way to meet these emergencies. It ought not to be necessary for local authorities to have to take this course. The proper method of dealing with the matter would have been for the Government to have made a special grant to tide over these emergencies, and such a grant might easily have been made by the schools being given their grants at the commencement, instead of the end, of the year. Now a Government Department declined to concur with the local authority in a matter of local government, and at the same time they had neglected to do what they might have done with regard to this matter in the Act of 1902. One of the great acts of omission in that Act was the omission of the question of finance, and now the Government denied to the local authorities the privilege of having an overdraft without being surcharged. If he had regarded this matter from a purely partisan point of view he should not regret the position, because it would only tend to make the Government unpopular, but what he feared was that it would also tend to make the provision of the schools, and the schools themselves, unpopular. What they were applying for now was an aid to the Act of last year, a smoothing of the path, a slight, 43 enabling action to make it possible for the Act and the schools to come more rapidly and smoothly into work than would otherwise be the case. He heartily supported the Amendment.
§ MR. HARDY (Kent, Ashford)
asked the right hon. Gentleman to accept the advice which had been offered from both sides of the House, and give the local authorities the freedom they all desired. The difficulty in the way of getting this money to start the scheme would act prejudicially to the Bill in rural districts, because this process fell heaviest on the districts in which there were most non-provided schools. The process suggested by his hon. friend was a simpler one than that suggested in the Bill. He earnestly hoped the right hon. Gentleman would see his way to give way in this matter.
§ SIR E. DURNING-LAWRENCE (Cornwall, Truro)
said the desire of the countryside was to make this Bill a great measure, and to make it work for the benefit of the children. He hoped nothing would be done by the Government to make that more difficult.
§ MR. WALTER LONG
thought there must be some misunderstanding with regard to the matter. What was intended by the supporters of this Amendment was that there should be power in the local authority to contract a temporary loan for immediate and pressing purposes. In his reply to the Amendment he thought the object of the Amendment was to substitute a perpetual overdraft for the loan, which would be contrary to the principles of sound finance, and that being so he had intended to resist it. But if he now understood that the object of the Amendment was that there should merely be power in the local authority to meet a pressing necessity by means of a temporary overdraft he would withdraw his opposition.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)
said the discussion to-day illustrated the great danger of passing Bills without discussing them. The financial part of the Act of 1902 was never discussed, and this was the result. 44 They were starting the local authorities with a great deficit, and that was not a proper thing to do. It was not fair to call upon these local authorities to borrow money and charge themselves with loans and interest and compel them to start with a large deficit when they ought to have started square. He thought the Government should consider the advisability of making some grant in this matter. To enable a local authority to overdraw at the bank was not good finance and might give rise to considerable difficulty. The present position was due to an oversight on the part of the Government, and under the circumstances it was not fair that the County Councils should be made to pay the penalty.
§ LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICE (Wiltshire, Cricklade)
congratulated the Government on having accepted the Amendment in the interest of the County Councils. The operation of the Act was most unequal. The county he represented would get through their difficulties fairly easily owing to the Act having come into operation last October, and to their having already made some arrangements, but with regard to the neighbouring counties it was quite a different matter. The proposal before the Committee would do something to ease the difficulty. If the Councils were allowed to overdraw when necessity arose the difficulty would be largely got over. In principle it might be said to resemble giving the County Councils power to issue bills. Of late years Committees upstairs had been gradually introducing the system of allowing large boroughs to issue bills similar to Treasury bills in the place of the old practice of overdrawing their accounts, which was an objectionable practice to go on permanegtly. The power of temporarily overdrawing was really a somewhat unsatisfactory form of allowing the Councils to do for a limited period for a special purpose that which Parliament was gradually giving large boroughs the power to do, under certain safeguards, in regard to local government finance generally. That being so, he thought they ought to thank the right hon. Gentleman for accepting the Amendment.
§ MR. HUMPHREYS-OWEN (Montgomeryshire)
said that when the County Councils came to levy these extremely heavy rates they would make the Act very unpopular, hamper education, and aggravate the difficulties which already existed. In his own county the amount required would represent about 4s. in the £ as compared with an average county rate of 8d. He therefore hoped the President of the Local Government Board would be able even now to use his influence with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in this matter.
§ MR. STEVENSON (Suffolk, Eye)
joined in the appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to use his influence with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in order to obtain, if possible, a grant for this particular purpose. The facilities given by the Amendment would relieve certain County Councils to some extent, but, after all, the difficulty in which they were placed was not of their own making. It was important that they should begin with a working balance, and whether they obtained the money on loan account or by an overdraft on their bankers, they would have to pay interest. It was hardly fair that, for a reason which could not be laid at their door, they should be called upon to burden the ratepayers with that additional expense, and he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would come to their relief.
§ SIR CHARLES WELBY (Nottinghamshire, Newark)
joined in reminding the Government of the existence of a very strong feeling in the country that they ought to have found money for the starting of the Act. At the instance of his constituents, who felt very strongly on this matter, he approached the Board of Education some weeks ago, and in reply he received a certain amount of genuine sympathy, but at the same time an intimation that, owing to the great financial embarrassments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in connection with the Budget, it was impossible to find any more money this year. Of course he accepted the situation, and felt great sympathy with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his difficulties, and did his best to quieten his constituents. The Committee would therefore understand 46 his feelings when, only a few weeks afterwards, the Chancellor of the Exchequer informed them that he was so full of money that he was able, not only to take fourpence off the Income Tax, but also to remit the registration duty on corn. In connection with this he would like to suggest to His Majesty's Government, not only that the money ought to be found for the purpose of financing the Act, but also the source from which it might be derived. The suggestion he wished to make was that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should retain the duty on corn for a year and use the money for the purpose of giving the Act a fair start. Then in a year's time, if the Government were still in the same mind with regard to the tax, a contingency which could not be counted on with certainty, there would be plenty of time to remit the tax to obtain any electioneering benefit that might accrue from it. Seriously he pressed upon the Government the desirability of finding the money for the fair starting of the Act of last year, and of removing the great prejudice existing against it in consequence of the financial difficulty that had arisen.
§ MR. ALFRED HUTTON (Yorkshire, W. R., Morley)
said he had not much sympathy with the appeals that were being made. Hon. Members opposite last year demanded that the County Councils should undertake this work, and they ought now to be prepared to meet the liabilities thereby involved. It had been frankly stated that the main difficulty was caused by so many denominational schools having to be taken over. But the Associations of Voluntary Schools had about £250,000 in hand, and if their schools were to be taken over, why should not the balances be handed over with them? If that were done the difficulty would be entirely met.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ The following Amendments stood in the name of the hon. Member for Morley:—"In page 1, line 9, after 'effect,' insert 'but such sums shall not be applied to the redemption of any debt contracted by the managers of the school."47
§ "In page 1, line 9, after 'effect,' insert' but such sums shall not be applied to the purposes of repairing any school-house, and shall be used exclusively for the purposes of maintenance.'"
said the first of the above Amendments was out of order because it really supposed the local authorities might do things which they certainly could not do. The local education authorities were not responsible for debts contracted by managers, and could not apply money towards their payment. With regard to the second Amendment, the local authority had not to repair the schoolhouses; that was the duty of the managers.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE
submitted that the Amendment was in order, as the local authorities were liable for wear and tear repairs.
§ MR. ALFRED HUTTON
said that when he placed the Amendment on the Paper he really meant it to cover all repairs. But, as his hon. friend had pointed out, under the Act of 1902, there was a possibility of the county authority applying money for the wear and tear of the schools, many of which had not been kept up to a proper standard, and he thought the right hon. Gentleman might consent to introduce the words he suggested.
In page 1, line 9, after the word 'effect,' to insert the words 'but such sums shall not be applied to the purposes of repairing any school-house, and shall be used exclusively for the purposes of maintenance.'"—(Mr. Alfred Hutton.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ SIR JOHN GORST
said that the local authority would not be able to spend the money in the manner suggested by the hon. Gentleman. The only wear and tear the local authority 48 could spend money on was the wear and tear caused by their own use of the schools. It would be very inconvenient if the local authorities were not able to apply the money for a purpose for which they were legally responsible.
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE
said that this section was extremely vague. Was the interpretation of the right hon. Gentleman accepted by the Government?
§ MR. LLOYD-GEORGE
said he would suggest instead of the words "to the purposes of repairing" the words "for the purpose of paying for such repairs in any school-house as may be effected or paid for by the local education authority." That would enable the local authority to pay for repairs for which they were legally responsible.
Proposed Amendment amended—
By leaving out the words 'repairing any school house,' and inserting the words 'paying for such repairs in the schoolhouse as may be effected or paid for by the local education authority.'"—(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
§ MR. WALTER LONG
said that the interpretation of his right hon. friend was the interpretation which the Government placed on the Act of 1902. He hoped that the local authorities would not be hampered in what was undoubtedly a very difficult task. He had been appealed to to endeavour to induce the Chancellor of the Exchequer to help the local authorities in their difficulties; and now it was proposed to limit their powers. The only cost of wear and tear the local authorities would defray would be the wear and tear consequent upon their own occupation and use of the schools. He, therefore, submitted that, while the matter no doubt was not very serious, it would, be undesirable to hamper the local authorities in the manner suggested. He hoped the Committee would not accept the Amendment.
§ Question put, "That those words as amended be there inserted."49
|The Committee divided:—Ayes, 87; Noes, 151. (Division List No. 109.)|
|Abraham, William (Rhondda)||Grant, Corrie||Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries|
|Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc., Stroud||Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-||Rickett, J. Compton|
|Asher, Alexander||Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)|
|Ashton, Thomas Gair||Helme, Norval Watson||Runciman, Walter|
|Austin, Sir John||Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H.||Russell, T. W.|
|Barran, Rowland Hirst||Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.||Samuel, Herbt. L. (Cleveland)|
|Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)||Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.||Shipman, Dr. John G.|
|Bell, Richard||Jacoby, James Alfred||Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)|
|Black, Alexander William||Jones, David R. (Swansea)||Soames, Arthur Wellesley|
|Brigg, John||Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)||Stevenson, Francis S.|
|Bryce, Right Hon. James||Kitson, Sir James||Tennant, Harold John|
|Burt, Thomas||Labouohere, Henry||Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.|
|Buxton, Sydney Charles||Layland-Barratt, Francis||Thomas, Sir A. (Glam., E.)|
|Caldwell, James||Leese, Sir Jos. F. (Accrington)||Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)|
|Cameron, Robert||Leng, Sir John||Toulmin, George|
|Causton, Richard Knight||Levy, Maurice||Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)|
|Channing, Francis Allston||Lewis, John Herbert||Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.|
|Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark||Lloyd-George, David||Wason, E. (Clackmannan)|
|Cremer, William Randal||Lough, Thomas||Weir, James Galloway|
|Crombie, John William||M'Crae, George||White, George (Norfolk)|
|Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)||Markham, Arthur Basil||White, Luke (York, E. R.)|
|Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)||Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen||Whiteley, George (York, W. R.|
|Duncan J. Hastings||Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham||Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)|
|Edwards, Frank||Palmer, G. Wm. (Reading)||Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddersf'd|
|Ellis, John Edward||Partington, Oswald||Yoxall, James Henry|
|Evans, Sir F. H. (Maidstone)||Paulton, James Mellor|
|Farquharson, Dr. Robert||Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—|
|Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith||Perks, Robert William||Mr. Alfred Hutton and|
|Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond||Price, Robert John||Mr. Goddard|
|Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)||Rea, Russell|
|Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.||Reckitt, Harold James|
|Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel||Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge||Hoare, Sir Samuel|
|Allhusen, Aug. Henry Eden||Cranborne, Lord||Hogg, Lindsay|
|Allsopp, Hon. George||Crossley, Sir Savile||Hudson, George Bickersteth|
|Anson, Sir William Reynell||Dalkeith, Earl of||Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R.)|
|Arrol, Sir William||Dalrymple, Sir Charles||Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse|
|Atkinson, Right Hon. John||Dickson, Charles Scott||Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred|
|Bain, Colonel James Robert||Doughty, George||Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)|
|Baird, John George Alexander||Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers||Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop|
|Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r||Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore||Kerr, John|
|Banbury, Sir Frederick George||Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin||Knowles, Lees|
|Bartley, Sir George C. T.||Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas||Laurie, Lieut.-General|
|Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.||Fardell, Sir T. George||Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow|
|Bignold, Arthur||Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward||Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monm'th)|
|Blundell, Colonel Henry||Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r||Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R.|
|Bond, Edward||Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.||Leamy, Edmund|
|Boscawen, Arthur Griffith||Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne||Llewellyn, Evan Henry|
|Bowles, Col. H. F. (Middlesex)||Fisher, William Hayes||Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.|
|Bowles, T. G. (Lynn Regis)||Flower, Ernest||Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine|
|Brown, Sir Alx. H. (Shropsh.)||Forster, Henry William||Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham|
|Butcher, John George||Fyler, John Arthur||Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.|
|Carew, James Laurence||Galloway, William Johnson||Lowe, Francis William|
|Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.||Gardner, Ernest||Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)|
|Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)||Garfit, William||Macdona, John Cumming|
|Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)||Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lond.||MacIver, David (Liverpool)|
|Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn||MacVeagh, Jeremiah|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.||Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon||M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire)|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Worc||Goschen, Hon. Geo. Joachim||Malcolm, Ian|
|Chapman, Edward||Greville, Hon. Ronald||Manners, Lord Cecil|
|Clive, Captain Percy A.||Groves, James Grimble||Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.|
|Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.||Gunter, Sir Robert||Melville, Beresford Valentine|
|Coghill, Douglas Harry||Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.||Mooney, John J.|
|Cohen, Benjamin Louis||Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Lord G. (Midd'x||More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire|
|Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready||Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf 'd||Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer|
|Colston, Chas. Edw H. Athole||Hay, Hon. Claude George||Mount, William Arthur|
|Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasg.)||Heaton, John Henniker||Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute|
|Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)||Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge||Tomlinson, Sir Wm. E. M.|
|Nicol, Donald Ninian||Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green||Tritton, Charles Ernest|
|O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Ritchie, Et. Hn. C. Thomson||Valentia, Viscount|
|O'Kelly, J. (Roscommon, N.)||Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye||Warde, Colonel C. E.|
|Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)||Round, Rt. Hon. James||Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts|
|Parker, Sir Gilbert||Royds, Clement Molyneux||Whiteley, H. (Ashton-u.-Lyne)|
|Pemberton, John S. G.||Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford||Whitmore, Charles Algernon|
|Percy, Earl||Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)||Wilson, John (Glasgow)|
|Pierpoint, Robert||Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew||Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath|
|Powell, Sir Francis Sharp||Simeon, Sir Barrington||Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm|
|Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward||Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East||Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson|
|Purvis, Robert||Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.||Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George|
|Pym, C. Guy||Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley|
|Rankin, Sir James||Sullivan, Donal||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—|
|Rattigan, Sir William Henry||Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)||Sir Alexander Acland-|
|Redmond, William (Clare)||Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)||Hood and Mr. Anstruther.|
|Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine||Tollemache, Henry James|
§ Bill reported as amended, to be considered upon Monday, 8th June.