gone ashore and got into a difficult position the shipwrights had proved themselves of great use in salving vessels. On one occasion he knew that they saved nearly £1,000,000 of money in salving a ship by constructing coffer dams and bringing that vessel into port. They only received however 5s. 6d. a day at the highest. That was not a high wage for skilled men in such a responsible position. The lower grades of shipwrights were paid 1s. 8d., 2s., and 2s. 4d. a day. The same class of men working in the private shipyards received 7s. a day. That was a matter into which some inquiry ought to be made. He did not think the Government ought to waste the taxpayers' money, but they ought to be model employers and pay something like the current rate of wages, taking, of course, into consideration the fact that the naval man received a pension at the end of his service. There was a good deal of dissatisfaction among the men in the lower grades of the service, and he therefore suggested that a Committee, not of naval experts but of business men, should be appointed to inquire into the matter. He would revert for a moment to the question of the canteen. The money spent by the men on a big ship in the canteen was about £700 a month, and the Government let these canteens out to a con tractor who sweated the men. Had we not now arrived at the time when "Liverpool pantiles "-the biscuits served out to the men-could be done away with? Ships could now carry proper stoves and stores and cook their bread on board, and not only would the barrels of flour take up less room than the barrels of biscuits, but the bread could be made on board ship at a cheaper price than biscuits could be supplied at and there would thus be a saving to the nation. Mr. Havelock Wilson.

*THE CHAIRMAN pointed out that the hon. Member was going into great detail on Vote 2. The general discussion was being taken on Votes A and 1, and points of detail on other Votes were usually left till those Votes were taken.

MR. HAVELOCK WILSON expressed his regret at having contravened the rules of order, but said a great deal of latitude had been given and he thought that he would be allowed to bring these points before the Committee. They were of very great importance. However, whether he had been out of order or not he had had his say, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give the matters his consideration.

*MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON said that the hon. Gentleman might rest assured that all the points he had raised would be well considered. He hoped hon. Members would now agree to the Votes.

Original Question, "That 128,000 officers, seamen, and boys be employed for the Sea and Coast Guard Services for the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1908, including 11,595 Royal Marines,” put, and agreed to.

2. £6,869,700, wages, etc., of Officers, Seamen, Boys, Coast Guard, and Royal

Marines.

Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next; Committee to sit again upon Monday next.

And, it being after half-past Eleven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at twenty minutes before Twelve o'clock.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Land Commission inform me that, for the period first mentioned, the number of fair rent agreements lodged with them was 18,799, and for the second period the number was 18,701.

Refusal of Commissioners to Sanction Land Sales.

MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state in how many cases the Estates Commissioners have refused to sanction the sale of estates under the Irish Land Act of 1903; and how many cases of refusal of sale were on the ground that the lands before them were not an estate.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have refused to sanction the sale of estates in fifty-four cases. In each of these cases the Commissioners' refusal took the form of declining to declare the lands to be an estate for the purposes of the Land Act, 1903.

Delay in Erection of School at Emly,
Tipperary.

MR. CULLINAN (Tipperary, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that negotiations for the erection of a national school at Emly, county Tipperary, have been carried on for over four years; and that on the 10th January, 1905, the Commissioners of National Education ordered the erection of a schoolhouse for 350 children; and if he can give an assurance that the necessary loan will be forthcoming at an early date so that this work may be proceeded with without further delay.

(Answered by Mr. Runciman.) I regret the delay of which the hon. Member complains, but the case has not been proceeded with pending a settlement of the general question of building grants to national schools which is still under

tonsideration.

Poor Law Administration. MR. PIKE PEASE (Darlington): To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will state the exact

Poor Law administration, and the number of Local Government Board Orders now in force, and not withdrawn to date; the number of amending Laws since the Act of 1834 to date; and will he consider the advisability of the consolidation of these statutes.

(Answered by Mr. John Burns.) It is difficult to give precise figures as regards these matters; but I may state that the Index to the Statutes enumerates under the head of "Poor" 158 Acts of Parliament (extending only to England and Wales) as being in force at the end of the session of 1905, and relating wholly or partly to the subject. Of these 118 have been passed since 1834. Many of the Statutes enumerated, however (as e.g. The Agricultural Rates Act, 1896), only relate indirectly to Poor Law administration. The number of Poor Law General Orders in force which apply to the whole or greater part of England and Wales may be taken as approximately sixty-five. I realise the advantage which would be likely to result from the consolidation of the Poor Law Statutes, but the work is one which would hardly be undertaken pending the Report of the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws.

Holding of Martin Maher of Ballingarry,

County Tipperary.

MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN (Tipperary, Mid.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether it is the intention of the Estates Commissioners on acquiring the farm on the Langley estate from which Martin Maher, of Ballingarry, in the county of Tipperary, was evicted, to have the farm divided instead of giving it back to him; and, if so, whether, in view of the fact that such a proceeding would be contrary to the provisions of The Land Act, 1903, he will take steps to see that Martin Maher gets back his entire holding.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that it is their intention to reinstate Martin Maher in a portion of his former holding, namely, 147 acres, and to utilise the remainder, amounting to 111 acres, for the enlargement of small holdings. The Commissioners hold that this proceeding is not contrary to the provisions of the Act of 1903.

Belfast Royal Irish Constabulary. MR. SLOAN (Belfast, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if, as the result of the recent inquiry regarding the Royal Irish Constabulary at Belfast, it is contemplated to make any changes in the present system; and, if so, can he state what will be their extent and character.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The only changes contemplated in the Belfast police system are certain changes in the allocation of the detective force, based on the experience of the working of the detective branch in recent years. The matter is at present under consideration. Appointments of Irish County Surveyors. MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the number of county surveyors who have been appointed since the Local Government Act, 1898, came into operation; how many were Roman Catholics and Protestants respectively; how many qualified by examination; and how many were appointed by competitive

examination.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) According to the records of the Local Government Board, five appointments to county surveyorships have been made since the Act of 1898 came into force. The Board have no information as to the religious belief of the persons appointed. County surveyors are required to pass a qualifying Civil Service examination. There is no competitive examination.

Increased Allowances to Irish Prison Officials.

MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the Treasury has recently sanctioned a grant of considerable benefit to the prison staff's in England by way of increase of salary and lodging allowance, he will consider the advisability of securing similar treatment to the officials of the Irish prison service.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I beg to refer to the Answer which I gave to the similar Question put by the hon. Member for South Meath on 18th February.† I have nothing to add at present.

See (4) Debates, clxix., 533-4.

WOMEN'S ENFRANCHISEMENT BILL. Order for Second Reading read.

the Women's Enfranread a second

were

*MR. DICKINSON (St. Pancras, N.) said that he rose with some diffidence to move that chisement Bill be time as he knew that there many Members of this House who had laboured for years in the cause of woman suffrage, and who were far better qualified to speak for it than he was. Especially he felt that he almost owed an apology to the hon. Member for Merthyr and the right hon. Baronet the. Member for the Forest of Dean for taking out of their hands the conduct of a Bill dealing with a subject to which their earnest and powerful advocacy had given impetus during recent years. But while far less competent than those hon. Members, he was not less earnest. In view of the opinion which he knew existed as to the expediency of bringing forward this measure at the present time, he could assure the House that he did so only because he was profoundly convinced that the political enfranchisement of women. would immensely add to the social advantage of the kingdom, and to the advance of civilization throughout the world; and that to avoid the discussion of it in this Chamber was neither politic nor just. His task had been rendered not less difficult by incidents which had recently taken place not far from the House. He did not venture to approve or disapprove of the methods adopted by some of the more ardent advocates of woman suffrage; but he submitted to the House that even if, in their opinion, those methods had been misguided personally he thought they had done a great deal of damage to the cause, in the eyes both of many Members of this House and of a large section of the thinking women in the country—it was all the more necessary that this great question should have a fair and unprejudiced consideration. It should be borne in mind that whatever had been done by a section of the advocates of woman suffrage they must not allow that to overshadow the patient and persevering endeavour on the part of many high-minded and intellectual women who for the last century had laboured for a cause which they regarded as of supreme importance to their sex and to humanity. What was that cause? It was merely the cause of woman suffrage.

and

not

It was really the cause of democracy, and it had been put forward on the broad principle that every citizen should have a right to vote for those who made the laws which he or she had to obey. We had acted on that principle partially in this country, and almost invariably when we extended self-government to the Colonies. The one exception we made was to exclude women from the category of citizenship. He did not propose to argue the principle of woman suffrage; he believed it was already accepted by the thinking people of this and other countries. [Cries of "No."] It had certainly been accepted by men to whom both sides of the House must give the utmost respect John Stuart Mill, Cobden, Fawcett, Maurice, Villiers, Lord Salisbury and Archbishop Temple, all of whom were firmly convinced of the expediency and justice of granting the suffrage to women. And they knew that the two men to whom the Sovereign of this country had entrusted the affairs of the nation-the respective leaders to whom on both sides of the House they owed great respect had announced themselves as being in favour of woman suffrage. No fewer than 400 Members of the House had also expressed their adherence to the principle of it. He did not wish to remind those hon. Members of any promises they had made; but he was justified in assuming that when the question was addressed to them their reply honestly represented what their feeling was, viz., that they were in favour of the principle of woman suffrage. Then the House in its corporate capacity had accepted the principle of woman suffrage on three separate occasions. When a Women's Franchise Bill was read a second time in 1897 it was carried by a majority of 71, 385 Members having voted. having voted. In 1904 Resolution

a

"That the disabilities of women in respect of Parliamentary franchise ought to be removed by legislation "—

was carried by a majority of 114. If they based their ideas of the franchise on the theory that he had laid down there was no logical answer to the claim of women to have the franchise. A woman was a citizen as much as a man was. She joined in almost all industrial enterprises; her labour contributed to the wealth of the nation; she took her share in all national movements; she Mr. Dickinson.

paid rates and taxes; she held no un honoured place in science, art, and literature; she had made her way into almost every profession; she was to be found in almost every commercial office. Even the old argument that women should not have the vote because they could not fight had been disproved by experience. The Boer women fought for their country; and no civilised nation could now send out an army to war unless it sent with it a band of heroic nurses, who were as willing to risk their lives under the Red Cross as were the soldiers in the fighting line. It was too late to raise the objection that women held a different position as citizens from that of men. It was also too late to raise the plea of their inferiority of intellect. Long ago we had abandoned the idea of setting up any standard of intelligence or education as a requirement for the granting of the franchise. Our registration laws, with their many inconsistencies, cut out a large number of men in all grades of society from enjoying the privilege of the franchise; but there was no man, in theory, so poor, so ignorant, or so vicious, who could not, by the simple expedient of holding a roof over his head for twelve months, obtain the whole rights of citizenship. So long as it could be said that no fewer than 34,000 men voters could not read the ballot papers on which they were asked to make their cross, it could not be alleged that women should not have the right to vote because of their inferiority of intellect. If the House were to lay down a criterion of education or insist that an elector should pass an examination, he ventured to say that women would gladly submit themselves to the same test and show themselves equally competent with men to be entrusted with the right to vote. It was also too late to raise the idea that the grant of the suffrage to women would injuriously revolutionise the social relationships of the sexes. We had now had experience of woman suffrage in different parts of the globe

in four States in America, in the Colonies of Australia, in Finland, and even at our own shores in the Isle of Man. Although he did not ask the House necessarily to follow the example of smaller nationalities, still they could draw a lesson from them, and in these countries there was a unanimity of opinion that none of the forebodings as