Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
9 articles on this Page
Hide Articles List
9 articles on this Page
EDUCATION BtLL. ? ..
News
Cite
Share
EDUCATION BtLL. Clause IV. Fight. THE MANDATORY MOTION. The Conimons on Monday went into Commib- tee on the Education Bill and proceeded to con- sider Clause 4, which provides that facilities for 'tpecial religious instruction 'n transferred Voluntary school in urban areas with a popu- lation exceeding 5,000 may be afforded if the ocal education authority is satisfied, after folding a public local inquiry, That the parents of at least four-nfths of the children tttending the school desire those facilities, Mid that there is public school accommodation tn schools not aiTected by a permission given under this section for the children attending the school whose parents do not desire those facilities." Subsections of the Clause enact that the special instruction given under the extended facilit.ies shall not be at the expense of the authority, and that a permission may be withdrawn by the local authority if after hoid.iag a public local inquiry it thinks chat the coftditioits on Hie strength of which the perrÏ:;¡i"si:õn:WAs:g¡:ven, no longer obtain. Mr EVEY' eUGIL moved to aubstihtte shall for may," so as to make the afford- big of extended facilities mandatory. Mr EIRHEEE. in declining to' accept the lIomendment. took the opportunity to explain the important amendments which had been placed on the the order paper by himself. He faid these new amendments did not in any way raise questions new to the Committee, ut really only focussed into a whole in a con. 1IeCubve myor the arncndment3 pattered about the order paper. All his observations must be taken to apply to Oausa 1. The clause as drafted was admittedly an Dbvious exception to the whole scheme and plan of the Bill as laid dO'n in the first clause. 't had i -and d;d not quarrel with the description—an excrescence on the whole BiM but it was in the opinion of the Stovernment a necessary clause, and ought to De made effective in consequence of what !ollowedthe debates in Committee on Clause t It b<td been said that if the Government had onlyhad the courage to base the measure -Dn an enturely secular system, or if they had copied- the facuities-aU-i'ound system— lhe pam-dsBO'Tuna.tionat system, as it was would be no necessitv for Clause t, and the eager supporters of the Govern- ment wouid have been spared a b-orden all iheir political minds and opinions by the appearance in a measure which they were Mixious to support of Clause 4, with *ts undoubted denominational flavour, -;aste, and character. That was quite Anaccurate. and had the Government either s-vstem they would still "aave been face to face with aU the dimculties ifh'ch made Clause 4 necessary, because it was not to he supposed that Roman Catholics 'M* Jews or Angi'cans would be content to say 'that all their religious feelings were gratified amply hy having half or three-quarters of an aour every school day of the week for the pur- pose oi teaching a mere catechism or formu- *ary. They would have said that was the ieaati part of religious education, and he agreed. ?Hear. he.ir.) Religious education consisted of something more- It consisted of a spirit animating the instruction—(Opposition cheers) —a spirit which was as much to he found, he hoped, in the Council schools as in the Volun- tary schools. (Ministerial cheers.) The clause as introduced was a purely voluntary clause. There was no kind of obligation on the local to c*ve fa cilities. As soon a. that tvas grasped the paper became crowded with Mnendments, making the clause mandatory, proceed mg from ali parts of the House. The Government had to consider whether they could meet the views represented by these amendments. One of the new amendments ught to remove the risk of any existing Voluntary school that fulfilled the conditions tJeing improperly refused by the local educa- tion authority, the extended facilities which were frankly contemplated by the clause. The Government proposed permitting an ap- peal to the Board of Education in the event of a. refusal by a local authority to make an arrangement for the tranter of the school. He hoped the necessity for such an appeal would rarely occur. When- ever it did the Board might, if it thought fit ,%fter consjdering the circumstances of the case and the wishes of the parents of the children attending the school, make its own order. Such an order, once made, must be complied with There was an alternative. If the Boird thought it was expedient they might make an order allowing the school to stand out as a State aided school, receiving a Parliamcn- tary e;"ant and not rate aid. He besought everyone who held those objections of prin- ciple which every educationist must enter- tain to schools standing out from the national system, to consider that this was an exception grafted on He was confident that it was not iiketv that the local authority would take upon themselves ni the first instance to refuse these expended factlities- If they did-and he did noc quarrel with anyone who considered the possibihty—then there was an appea! to the Board of'Education. Assuming the Board of Education supported the appeal, it was most umikcly that the local authority would refuse to be guided by the decision of the Board of Education. If. however, they stil! held out. them was a mandamus, but there was the other alternative suggested—that the -school should continue' as a State-aided jcbooi That was a mo-:t remote con- tingency. There was another amend- sient which provided for a further contingency, which was even more improbable. than the other. Assume that the local edu- cation authority had taken over the school 4nd the n-iation;; between the managers and the ioca) authority become strained-one was disposed to be tyrannical and the other was ragbag and foolish, then there would be an appeal to the Board of Education, and if that appeal was upheld they might contract out &s it was caUed. or stand out as he caued it, and receive the .Parliamentary grants on]y. and receive the .Parliamentary grants on]y. There -!guin tbeGovermnentsho'wed their good faith in th.:? matter and how intent they were that the facilities offered in the clause should not be illusory. The advantage of the amend- iae!tts he had outlined were obvious. The amendments provided that if there was any djLfferenceof opinion between theauthoritics and the tour-nith school as to whether it should be taken over there should be aD,rappeal. If in the opinion of the Board of Education the school should be takcnover in that sense it might become an obligation upon the local authority to take over the school on the terms and con. ditions nxed by the Board of Education. He was giving a great advantage by this amend- ment. Another amendment provided that in these four-fifth schools there should be no rent. He had already stated the reasons why he thought that now became reasonable. The Bill as introduced was a purely voluntary arrangement. There was no obligation to take schools. There was any quantity of room for any dispute as to what the rent should be. They had altered that and made it possible that the 'local authority might be required to take over the school and grant these tacihties, and they thought it was much more conducive o these schools being taken over by voluntary arrangement without any appeal at all, which after all was what they wanted to say and in these four-fifths schools the question of rent should not afford an opportunity of haggling or bargaining between the parties, but that it should be eliminated from the negotiations. (Opposition laughter.) As a saieguard they bad introduced the haiiot to secure condition A. He did not suppose anybody would object to that a mean;, oi: ascertaining the wishes of the parents of the children, and they also provided that the children should be in average attendance at the school ior not less than six months, so as to prevent tho moving about of children from One school to another simply for the purpose of obtaining these facilities. He thought the the Government propoed were far more practical than those proposed by Mr Cecil. He maintained that these amendments would give effect to the desire of the hon. mem- ber, while they would certainly give effect to the desire of the Government, which was that the facilities in the clause should be real and genuine facilities. It was, in his opinion, the Mst scheme for giving security to the schools they sought to benefit by the clause. (Minis- terial cheers.) Catholics Unsatisfied. Lord E. was anxious to say a few word- in explanation of the view taken by his [ellow Catholics of the Government's new pt o- posais. His eo-ireigionists. he sajd, received these proposals with great disappointment and much surprise. (Hear, bear.) They had been led to believe, and in fact it had been admitted by the Government, that Clause 4 had been in- serted in the Bill for the purpose of meeting Lheir case- Instead of doing so. however, the clause would destroy practically one batf of the Catholic, schools. Contracting out might be some attractton. but in the form in which it was put :0rthe right hon. gentleman's amend- ment it meant starvation. (Hear, hear.) In the opinion of the Catholic community the onlv practical result of the new proposals of the Government was to deprive the owners of Catholic schools of the rent promised by the Bill. A Dght of appeal was given, but the only result of an appeal was to be an order to starve. (Hear, hear.) { Mr E. BLAKE said if it were insisted that I the price of religious freedom in their schools tthouid be the loss of rent the Catholics would readily make the sacrifice. Mr H. PAUL supported the amendment before the Committee. He thought it could not be denied that thia was a Christian and a Pro- testanb Bill, and it followed from that that acme little indulgence was owing to the Jews ajid Catholics. Mr LYTTELTON had no doubt that the feeling against paying for denominational teaching which had found expression in the Dasstve resistance movement would determine the d?c?ons of numerous local education ?uthori?. The Minister for Education had always contempiat,ed the possibility of strenu- ous opposition to Clause 4. The nght hon. ?tien?n bad referred to the remedyof man. S???????? S?.,S???-?.??? ??.°.????? starve .he dcnom?at;onat schoots by meana of ?"?onrr.icting out "order. th..<- Dr. MAC?AMARA. wtule cons?denng that the proposal that there should be no rented where these extended facilities were g?r, ;t was a fair one. saw no good reason for tnx to ma.'kc: the clause mandatory. .f contracting out proposals no tv put forward by the Government, he was extremely sorry it had emanated from a Liberal Front Bench. (Hear. bear.) It was wholly a!:en to Liberal principles to allow a school to draw nine-tenths of its income from public sources and yet re- main outside of public centre*). He viewed this contracting out proposal with great disap- pointment and with something very nearly approaching disgust. Mr L BLARDY considered that the new pro- posals of the Government placed a premium upon the refusal of local authorities to grant extended facilities. Mr BELLOC wished to make the clause directly mandatory. Mr W. REDMOND behoved that if the amendments proposed by the Government were carr led the Roman Catholic schools would be put back to the position they occupied before the year 1902. If the poor struggling Roman Catholic schools were deprived of re- ceiving rent as proposed by these amendments it would inua.me the Roman Catholic people with the idea that a gross injustice was being done them. He urg"d the Government to make the clause mandatory. Mr Chamberiain's Attack. Mr CHAMBERLAIN said the fact that no member had really supported the Government showed that it was impossible to amend the I Bill. It was drawn on wrong lines, and could not be a final settlement. He should vote for the amendment, caring very little whether it was carried or not. He believed the clause was honestly introduced to give facilities in a large number of cases, but if may remained the ciausc would be wholly illusory and a sham. The Government scheme was so elaborate that few people outside the House could understand it. It would allow schools tvbich were not permitted to enjoy facilities to contract themselves out. That would be doing a great injustice to those schools what- ever denomination they were. It would put them in an intolerable position. If they accepted the amendment and made the clause mandatory every other provision in the clause should be made mandatory, and they must do away with the absurd, ridiculous, and inconsistent distinction between urban and other areas. (Opposition cheers.) They must do away with that other absurd proposition that four-fifths of the parents were entitled to a conscience and three-fifths were not ent t]ed to any conscience. If they did not they would not be carrying out the pledges they bad given, and would be providing facilities for denomina- tional instruction. What would the passive resistors say then ? (Opposition cheers.) That brought them back to the separation of reli- gious from secular teaching. That was the only possible solution. Mr A. SPICER believed that Clause 4 was rea.sona.bie because it was to be worked by a local authority. Mr T. \V. RUSSELL should vote for the clause bein mandatory. because he believed that to thr'v the religious questions into muni- cipal elections all over England wouid be one of the worst thins the House of Commons could do. Mr RAMSAY MACDONALD had he<'n ex- ceedingiy amused by some of the speeches delivered that afternoon. If the country had been Nonconformist to any great extent lie could have understood them. He wanted to point out that having by a large majority rejected the idea that it was only the duty of the State to concern itself with secular educa- tion, the House would only deal with this religious question by applying those principles of toleration which demanded the recognition of the existence of different denominations- Ho supported the amendment before the Com- mittee. Mr L. Withams to the Rescue. Mr LLEWELYN WILLIAMS said the right hon. member for Birmingham- (-'Ylr Chamberlain), had referred to the fact that no member on that side had got up and said they supported the amendments proposed by the Government. That was the reason he rose to state that he represented the vast majority of members onthatsidc in telling the Government that they had the undivided support of the vast majority of their followers if they were'pre- pared to stick to their Bill and to the amend- ments they had put on the paper. In the last few days the members who had been most vocal on the Liberal side were those who opposed the Government, but he asked the Government not merely to regard the views of those members, but also to regard the views of thoss who silently followed the Government into the Division Lobby. He was one of those who supported the secular amend- ment, and be regretted ever since that more members had not had the courage of their opinions to support the amendment That was the logical and inevitable solution, but the Government had not accepted it. The Bill had been built on the principle of local option. Clause 4 as it stood gave the local authority the option to give extended facilities, and he urged the Government as they had after mature thought introduced a Bill based on the prin- ciple of local option not to -,auow themselves cheers)—or to be M&ndished out of it by speeches made on cither side of the House. Lord Ba!carr&-i had said tha.t 50 per cent. of the Catholic schools would be destroyed by Clause 4. Nothing surprised him more than to hear that reiterated. Mr D1LLON Clause 4 leaves 50 per cent. of the CathoHc schools outside its operation. Mr WILLIAMS Does the hon. member mean to say that if 50 per cent. do not come within the operation of Clause 4 they will not come within the operation of Clause 3 ? Mr D1LLON Clause 3 is no use to us at all. Mr WILLIAMS That is another matter. If a school, he continued, could not be brought within the conditions of Clause 4, there was nothing to prevent that school being brought within Clause 3. That was not the destruc- tion of denominational teaching in this country. As to contracting out, if he thought it would be used by the Board of Education indiscriminately, or that its power would be invoked to a large extent, he would view it with great apprehension but he did not conceive that anything of that kind would happen. He assured the Irish members that the We)sh members, who represented the greatest body of Nonconformists in this country, only asked that local option should be allowed them because they bad not got a Parliament of their own to decide what they wanted. Mr D1LLON We arc going to support your part of the Bill. Mr WILLIAMS said he was glad to hear that, but that dealt with only a small part of the Home Rule question. If this clause was made mandatory a greater flame would he kindled in Wa]e.;¡ than the present Government would be able to put out. but if local option was allowed if they trusted the local authorities in Wales the Bill would work smoothly and well. Someone had said, Suppose there was a pig-headed authority ?" No one knew better than he did that things were done during the last three or four years buth in W&iea I and outside it which in their sober and calmer moments none of them would like to justify. There was a state of war and the Welsh Coercion Act, as it was called, was
Advertising
Advertising
Cite
Share
J OMEN f'¡. J Especially Mothers The Sana*e,Antisenfic, Cleans- ing, Puriiliug, and 8aayt¡" tying Proxies of øtlCUf4 } SOAP Assisted by Cuticufa Ointment, the gteat Skin Care, are of price- less value. For preserving, puri- fying, and beautifying the skin, for deansing the scalp of crusts, scales, and dandruff, and the stopping of faHing hair, for sof- tening, whitening, and soothing red, rough, and sore hands, for baby rashes and chafings, in the form of baths for annoying irritations, uicerations, and inflam- mations of women, and many san- ative, antiseptic purposes which readily suggest themselves, as well as for all the purposes of the toilet, bath, and nuysery, Cuticura Soap and Cuticura Ointment are of in- j estimable value. MM! TiUs m?y be had of «D ehooist'. I?n<ion r?pot: F .Kewbery & a<ms, I?d. Potter Drug & Chem. C«fp., Sofe.r?op?Boatom.MM?U.S.A. .iS-Sj&FMe,"AB<?tetWMMN.
NEWPORT HARNESS CASE.
News
Cite
Share
NEWPORT HARNESS CASE. Summons Dismissed. At Newport on Wednesday Ernest T. Webb, general dealer, Lyne-road, Newport, was further charged with stealing a set of pony harness, value JE3 10s. from Charles West. builder, Christchurch. Wehb. it will be remem- bered, said that he purchased the harness from a person who was known as Williajns, Bristol, a.nd George Cry er. He produced a receipt showing that he had paid G. Williams for the harness. Mr Lyndon Moore, tor the prosecution, now said that they could not produce the witness who was known as Williams. Bristol, or George Cryer, as he was in Usk Prison. They required a.n order from the Home Secretary to secure his attendance in court. P.S. Barry as well as 'defendant had seen Williams that day. When Williams was told that defendant had pur- chased harness from him he den ied it. It was f*nly fair to say that Williams was a notorious criminal, and his word could not be depended on. Harry Venn, coal merchant, said that he purchased the ham ess from defendant. The letter told him be had purchased it from a man named Williams. The Bench thought that the evidence did not justify them in sending defendant for trial, and discharged Webb.
IR!D!NG ON TRAMS.-
News
Cite
Share
I R!D!NG ON TRAMS. Tredegar Cottier's Narrow Escape. At Tredegir Police Court on Tuesday Gomer Williams (19). haulier.and Percy Harris (23), collier, Tredegar, were summoned for a, breach of the Mines Act bv riu'.ng on the trams at No. 1 Pochin Colliery. Tredegar. Mr B. H. Spencer, who prosecuted, said that offences of this description were becoming very frequent. One would have thought," said Mr Spencer, that a, .collier's work was hazardous enough, without h.m making it more so." The pro- secution were really protecting the men a gainst themselves. The overman, David Evans, said that he watched for riders on the trams, and WiUiams sprang oS into his arms. Harris also sprang off in a narrow place where there was no manhole, and witness was surprised that he escaped with his life. Defendants' were each &ned 40s, including costs.
fRitua) Report. -
News
Cite
Share
f Ritua) Report. BtSHOP'S VETO TO BE ABOLISHED. The report of the Boya! Commission ??th" siastica! Discipline was formaJIy 1?'d ?'?t ? table of Parliament on Tuesday "?g.l& dummy, and will be published in a. fevl"I bled the meantime the Press Association is ? ?p. to supplement the forecast it: issued ?,.jpieB* day of the principal provisions and reco dations of the report. ? tb? One of the first recommendations \s g?ef two Houses of Convocation should s)t ?? ? )0 for the purpose of considering a new ru ? place of the present ornaments rubric s ?gf longer to leave any doubt as to wl1a. goo ijic-nts, etc., May be worn. T. he,sColl' body ia also to consider any modifications sO sidered necessary in any of the other ru t into as to bring the services of the Church MOT is harmony \vitb modern requirements. with a view to gic.der elasticity, Tha Commissioners advise that conslf tbe tion should be given to the subject o Athanasian Creed, pda" Another important point is a tion that the Bishop's power nf veto ?o? prosecutions for Ritualistic i rregularit'es "?g be abolished al-!o that the* bi.jhops ni?Y? ?? to institute into a. new living any ????icg who has disobeyed the Law in his present? unless he undertakes future obedience.. [1lpri- The Commissioners recommend that ?'?ig- sonment should not be innicted upon P ,?py may instead be not only deprived of ? present livings, but inhibited and prevs from the acceptance of any other livti?g- ?? It is proposed to institute a new ??'to appeal for ecclesisastical cases, and in ?'t)0 meet the scruples of those offending the have hesitated to accept the authority 01 ÐJJý. Privy Council it is proposed that aJ1či dispute as to points of doctrine the ceremonial may be referred to .? bishops as a body. The ruling upon suchp?? is to be final, and must be accepted "?at court. It is not proposed to give a sp!? ?, character to the appeal court itself, "? ? preserve the authority of the State over ? Church. The desire for spiritual g"'?°f?t to be satisfied by the reference to the Rp??. Hench. It is proposed that for particular ? ?g. sions the bishops, acting together, ??r'fCt of service, any such recommendation ?.t.?i' bishops jointly to he accepted by each '? dual bishop.
------NOVEL USE OF POOR-BOX.
News
Cite
Share
NOVEL USE OF POOR-BOX. Mr F. H. Jotham and Aid. Jacobs had bc? them on Wednesday at Cardiff Police CC' Wm. Edwards, a. plasterer (51), who had "? brought from Hirmingham, charged '? neglecting to pay C5 3s arrears and costs d??g told the Court tha.t her liusband lived ? another woman, he had sent he!' no III and did not care how she lived. Edwardsj' in that he had been out of work for 10 wee he consequence of an injury to his foot, and aE could not work he had not the means to P??. Mr Jotham asked him how much he wa? P pared to pay. -?a Prisoner I can pay nothing, sir. ? only 5d in the world, are Serge-mt Price (the court omccr) There :Bit" £111s 6d costs for bringing him here froro ? mingham. ? Mr Jotham (to defendant): You wilt h?gt? find the ;E5 3s in a month, and then the ? win be considered. ?? .Edwards then wanted to know bow ?t.pft to go back to Birmingha.m, and after ? ?'? consultation with the cterk the magist? ? ordered the fare to Birmingham, amount?? 8s lid, to be paid out of the poor box.
PLIMSOLL LINE SUBMERGE
News
Cite
Share
PLIMSOLL LINE SUBMERGE Captain Fined at Cardiff. ? Evan Evans, ma.ster of the stea.n?? Rosario, owned by Orders and Handl ? Ltd.. Nev/port, was summoned before CardiS Stipendiary on Wednesday tor o loading his vessel.. oSe- Mr Ivor Vachell, who appG;?red to pr .?g cute on behalf of the Board of Trade, s allegation was that the steamer was o tb loaded at. Bilbao to such an extent a.5bef submerge the disc. This was detected o& ? arrival at Cardiff, when she was IDeasure- Board of Trade omcials, and the me a.teJ ments indicated that the disc in salt would be submerged four inches. ?? Mr Ivor Bowen. on behalf of the codp?? admitted the breach of the Act. but P'?ot that this was the nrst yoyage that defeo ?g had taken fM master, and that the vesgeL ? ) oaded in his absence under the superv?tO?.. the chief ofScer, who admitted that the ??? loading was due entirely to a mistake want of care on his part. nn aød The Stipendiary imposed a 6ne Of,f-,2-0 ALia costs. or one mouth's risonm i'Or' t
Advertising
Advertising
Cite
Share
<' ? In the hot weather, a §j a seasonable jj delicacy is H II P rlt SAUCE ECONOMtCAL & REL!ABLS. 0' iOK3AM The best E??s P8MER ja the Wor? So!d everywhere ;n td. and ?d. pacte?: ?"o 6d., ?6 and 5;- TIN CANtSTEK? ? PICKLES bring out the B H flavour of cold meat, and ? ? render it appetizing and a !a enjoyable. But the pickles a? E must be GOOD. a)/ Mm LAZE N B PICKLES j are the best of all, pickles, being unsur- ???? passed both with regard ?'??? to quality and navour. ???? MIXED, PICCALILLI ?nd !????m ANGLO-INDIAN RELISH, and many other ivaricties. In glass botlle., (11' stone cf all E. LAZENBY SON, Ltd., I Do you like -aíq]@1í-) .Lai A SOAP THAT tB BEAU-Y nnvnrs" ? ,?J in hot weather? After oyclta?. teoB"' t? j?j orwalkin?, 11 T CAL VERT'S ? Carbolic Toilet SoaP ? tp! keepa tho skin. soft and smooth, "?gt ? L:: removes tha unpleasant effects o? "? ? ?' deiightful feeling of thorough pu)-if'?'°"' f? mj M. <a&?x, 1/6 ?3-?6.; to?-fs, a< C??'??' ? !=. Sampla ft?e if yo)i send postage—td. at"?" ? Made by F. C. CALVERT & Co,. Manch6 tor* ? 10 a fêJ1r:: ,i:: I I I FREEMT TO USERS OF ? mg^ HOE'S SAUCc ziliLliAll, By C?7 H?. pM?K? ?.?-' A magtii¢ reproduction ?*' ), lovely picture (size 23in. ? by printed in twenty-two colo?- ?; Raphael Tuck & Sons, I??ibe Printers to their Majesties, ? ? sent post paid in exchange c?c? wrappers taken from Hoe zilla. bottles, and addressed to Tjtd.t esse td-O Art Dept., Hoe & Co., L ) 259, Deansgate, Manchester.
EDUCATION BtLL. ? ..
News
Cite
Share
passed against the protest of Welsh members, and he was sorry the Irish members votoo for it. Mr DILLON I never did. Mr WILLIAMS Some of your party di.i. The Coercion Act was passed, he said. to coerce these people into doing what they did not want to do. This Bill could not be passed without the consent of the vast majority of Liberal members. It had met with the approval of Mr Lloyd George, who was the greatest Nationalist leader they had yet produced, and a Bill that was supported by him was not to be nouted by the Welsh authorities. The Bill would go to the coastitucncies in a different way from that of 1902, and it would go with greater sanction behind it. (Ministerial cheers.) He did not believe that the contracting out provision would be operative in more than a few cases, and her did not believe it would be operative at all in Wales. However that might be, he believed in the jus- tice of leaving to each locality to decide what was best for its own community, and he was certain that if those vitally interested in de- nominational schools would only trust the people their trust -would not be misplaced. (Ministerial cheers.) Mr WYNDHAM pointed out that no fewer than seven conditions were imposed by the Bill, and had to be satisned before the school could be taken over by the local authority. Having irr. "nsed conditions so stringent, surely Parliament tould take upon its own shoulders the respousibihty of saying that where these conditions were fulfilled there should be re- ligious freedom- T MrT. P. O'CONNOR said that he was in. formed on authority that nearly 500 Catholic schools would be excluded from Clause 4 if the limitations proposed by the Government were persisted in. Mr Batfour and Consistency. Mr BALFOUR said the debate had shown that those who defended the Government were those who differed from their policy. (Laughter.) That was one of the most singular incidents of Parliamentary debate ever remembered. The amendment was plain, straightforward, and intelligent, but the Government's amendments were tortuous, ambiguous, and wholly unjustifiable. Local option was no longer the Government policy in regard to this clause. The Board of Educa. tion was to have a great share in determining what should be done, but there was no guarantee that the Board would remain a judicial body. The plan of the Government was clumsy beyond expression. (Opposition cneers.) It had now become an habitual pro ceeding on the part of the Government, driven by argument, to give something to the Volun. tary schools. They made a concession on Clause 2 they were now making what they called a concession on Clause 4. They sought to conciliate their Nonconformist supporters by imposing a pecuniary nnc on those whose religious convic- tions they were endeavouring to satisfy. Under the Government amendments the local authority would have a pecuniary motive to quarrel with the managers of Voluntary schools, and there was the prospect of intoler- able quarrelling. (Opposition cheers.) In every Local Government area, if every Voluntary school were kept going out of the rates, every man who had been a passive resistor up to the present moment must obviously continue to be a passive resistor. (Opposition cheers.) There was no loophole out of that embarrassing situation under Clause 4 as it originally stood. But there was a loophole if every Voluntary school within the area of passive resistance was to be driven by a local authority to become a State-aided school. Then, and then only, would the conscience of the passive resistor be at peace then only would he feel justified in obeying the laws of the country. The tempta- tion to the local authority would be overwhelm- ing. Who could doubt that in places like the West Riding of Yorkshire or Wales the local authority would without hesitation choose the course which relieved their friends from all these dimculties of conscience ? He agreed with the hon. member for Camberwell (Dr. Macna- mara) that the contracting out clause was retrograde, and he had never before so fully realised what a great educational measure the Act of 1902 was. (Ironical Ministerial cheers.) This contracting-out clause was thoroughly and completely reactionary. (Opposition cheers.) It not only put the schools as they were before 1902, but it emphasised the evil of the retrograde step by making them fall from the height to which the Act of 1902 raised them. Surely it -vas a most grotesque result of the fortnights debate (Opposition cheers). What- ever might betheresultof the division he hoped it would be felt that the policy advocated by the Government was one which had not the support eyen of those who went into the lobby in favour of it for it carried with it every evil consequence both to the cause of denomina- tional teaching and the cause of secular educa- tion. (Opposition cheers.) On the motion of Mr BIRRELL progress was then reported In the House of Commons on Tuesday, Mr BIRRELL announced that the Govem- t!ient<with one accord, without any difference of opinion whatsoever. had deiermi-ned to stick to the clause with the Government amendments. (Ministerial cheers.)' The Oppo- sition wished all schools to be denomina- national. They would put uot only Rome on the rates, but also Lambeth, Lord Halifax- (laughter)—Dr. Clifford—(laughter)—and Lady Wimborne. Quakers, and recreative Reiigion- jsts—(laughter)—everyone alike—(laughter.) Those in whose interest the clause was pro- posed had received it coldly, and in some cases the Government had been abused. He was in no way surprised at the course the debate had taken, but the Government had exammed the question thoroughly, and had dete!?tpedto pursue the clause and maintain it. (Mimsterial cheers.) If the amendment were made man- datory it would enable a local authority to be brought before the King's Bench, but as that court bad no machinery to determine the ques- tion it could do no good. The Government believed that in order to make the clause work- able an appeal to the Board of Education was far better and a more suitable wav of dealing with the question. The Board of Education was in constant touch with these authorities. It knew their character, and it could bnng a machinery into operation wbicb would not he used if the amendment were carried. The bias of the Board of Education would always regard with inteaae dislike any. thing which would remove from the national system any school. It would be only under special circumstances that they would adopt an exceptional course. He believed that the amendment would entirely fail to carry out the wishes and desires of both sides of the Houss. Making it mandatory would only add to their dinlculties (Ministerial cheers,. Mr J. REDMOND submitted that as the House had decided in favour of religious education in the schools, it ought to take special care that the Bill should not become an instrument of tyranny, and that the religious education given was not abhorrent to the re- ligious convictions of the children and their parents- He did not distrust the elective bodies of this country, but some of them would certainly be found recalcitrant. It would therefore be a ridiculous result of the labours of that Parliament if any obscure body should have the power of defying the wishes of that House, and refuse to carry out the expressed intentions of Parliament. The present pro- posals of the Government were mad, and wicked, and cowardly—(Nationalist cheers)- in this sense, that instead o< propos- ing that Parliament should decide for itself, they wished to give the power to local authorities, more or less responsible and elected to carry out a multiplicity of dif- ferent objects. He entirely disapproved of the contracting-out proposal, because that would mean semi -starvation of the scho"L The pro- posal as to vaying no rent was mean and shabby. The only 'two possible solutions of the education question were either secular or allowing creeds to teach their own religion in the schools but if the latter course were de- stroyed all religion would be driven out of the schools. (Nationalist cheers.) Mr ATHERLEY JONES regarded: the pro- posals of the Governmet as an honest attempt to meet a most dimcult situation by a com- promise. He opposed it because he believed that the effect ofmaldng the clause mandatory would be to expose the local authorities to being shot at by the various denominations. Mr F. E. SMITH had heard no single argu- ment against the amendment except the alle- gation made by the Minister for Education that there would be some technical difficultv in applying for a mandamus, which would render the amendment hard to enforce. He would like to hear from the right hon. gentle- man how he explained the impossibility of applying to that amendment thn very means upon which he relied for coercing the local authorities. Mr LOUGH: The Minister for Education wishes mandamus to be the last resort. Mr SMITH: Does bhe hon. gentleman suppose we wish it to be the 6rst ? (Opposition cheers.) Was ib not time that these pitiable contradictions and evasions should find an end ? (Opposition cheers.) He sympathised with the Minister for Education in respect of the attacks made upon him by Nonconformist members of his own party, because those attacks showed that there was no reward even for drinking the cup of humiliation to the dregs. The right hon. gentleman might now.however. cast aside the role of Issaehar as far as the Bill was concerned. (Opposition cheers.) Mr ADKIN8 described the preceding speech. as more appropriate to a debating society than that House. He preferred, he said, to approach the consideration of the great and dimcult subject before the Committee in a humbler spirit and with greater regard for practical dimculties. The proposals of the Government had his hearty support. Mr DILLON believed that if the Committee were sincere in desiring to give enect to the promises of the Government it would adopt the amendment, and thus ensure that the local authorities would loyally and honestly carrv out the clause. The Catholics were asked to trust the local authorities, but there were men on those bodies who had already shown for the sake of their consciences they were pre- pared to defy the law, and when the Bill had passed the Dr. ChSords would stump all Eng- land against Clause 4. If the Liberals per- sisted in the course they proposed they would inflict upon their party a wound which it would take a long time to heal. (Nationalist cheers.) THE PREMIER SPEAKS. Sir H. CAMPBELLBANXERMAN. who was received with loud and prolonged Minis- terial cheers, refused to believe that anything like the mischief would follow from this clause that had been prophesied. If he thought so he jshould not be so hardened a supporter of it as lie was. He would aek those who opposed it to take care that they did not go further and fare worse. (Ministerial cheers.) The only alternative offered from the Opposition side of the House was State -provided secular instruc tion—(Ministerial cheers)—and an indiscrimi- nate liberty of all sects to teach anv religion they liked. He felt almost the necessity of an apology for interfering in this debate, because he had been enforcedly absent from it from Srst to last. He trusted he had nothing to apologise for. He sometimes thought he was neglecting his duty as leader of the House, but the bitterness which was the cause of his absence had largely been removed by the kind feeling of sympathy which be had received. (General cheers and renewed cheers.) He asked the Committee to remember that this was an undenominational Bill. The Govern. ment idea was that the common elements of Christianity with a flavour of Protestantism in them should be taught in the schools. In his simplicity he should have thought that at least to the Church of England that would not have been obnoxious. (Ministerial cheers.) They also provided that instruction should be given two days a week in special doctrine- The Catholics were in a different position, and as they claimed a special atmosphere and control of the whole school the Government thought that exception should be made which would include the Cathohes, and might include also the members of the Estabtished Church who were more Catholic than anything else. (Minis- terial laughter.) The genera! scheme of the Bill did not meet that claim, and so the Govern- ment bat introduced Clause 4. Their adhesion to the principle of that clause was firmly rooted. They did not depart in any degree from it. Its machinery had been subjected to the closest scrutiny and as it stood it avoided more dim- culties and accomplished more advantages than any other machinery that could be invented for the purpose. The clause was essential to the main purposes of the Bill. The object of the Government was to make the Bill as equit able as possible and therefore be appealed to those who had strong prejudices, high ideals in regard to education,not to refuse their support to a scheme which would benefit the education of the country, remove grievances, and do justice to the desires and interests of the public at large. (Ministerial cheers.) Mr Baifour's Piea. Mr BALFOUR expressed his full apprecia- tion of the reasons which prevented the Prime Minister from being present during the debates. If the right hon. gentlpman had been present he would have known how strong was the feel- ing of Churchmen against the Bill. Any states- man who fai!ed to recognise the fact did not know bow to read the signs of the times. (Opposition cheers.) If Clause 4 were passed passive resistors would stiH have no reiief. By proposing it the Government were deliberately vioiating the consciences of those who were their most active superiors at the last election. If the Bill passed in its present shape with Clai-ise 4, the Government woutd find ranged against them not only the Catholic feeling, but an amount of feeling in the Established Church which no Government ought with a light heart to endeavour to offend. (Opposition cheers.) What those leaders cf Protestant through! disliked amongst other things, was the sub- stitution of universal Cowper-TempIeism for the denominational teaching at present given in the schools. Every man who took part in the important division against the amendment must understand that he was dealing not meretv with Roman Catho)ics, Jews, and a small section of the clergy and laity of the Established Church, but that broadly speaking he had against him the whole feeling of that Church. The idea of proposing to the country a settlement which pleased neither the denom- inationalist nor the undenominationalist and asking its acceptance as a final settlement of this tremendous probicm was really playing with a great ca.nse. It was idle to meddie with r subjects which you could not settle and to leave unredressed ancient wrongs while you created a large number of new wrongs which must in turn breed fresh dimculties for the House and the country. Those were the rea- sons which made him earnestly press the Committee in the interest of a general settlement to support the amendment. The Division The Committee divided, there voting— For the ameocment. 237 Against. 340 Goveroioent majority. 103 The announcenMm of the ngures was fol- lowed by prolonged Opposition and Nationalist cheers and counter cheers from the Minis- terialists. Question of Appea). Dr. MACNAMARA had an amendment on the paper providing for an appeal to the Board of Education, and ill moving it formally he said this provision was included in the Govern- ment amendment, "d he should not press it now. He hoped .however, that the President of the Board of Education would allow his amendment to be Put in such a way that the Committee could divide separately on the question of an appeal, which they all sup- ported, and the provision for contracting out. Mr BIRRELL difl cot think it would be pos- sible to make the division Dr. MACNAMARA oSered to withdraw his amendment, but hoped the Government would reconsider that determination. Mr BALFOUR asked whether the Minister for Education, having decided that there should be an appeal to the Board of Education. would consider the propriety of introducing into the clause words which would direct the Board to take care that the arrangements between the local authorities and the owners of the schools provided for religious education on the lines to which the schools had hitherto been accustomed. Mr BIRRELL promised to consider the point. The amendment was withdrawn. Proposed General AppNcation. Mr CAVE moved the omission of the words in an urban area for the purpose oi giving to urban and rural areas alike the benefits of Clause 4 Mr LOUGH said the Government were un- able to accept the amendment. Clause 4 was made an exception to the genera! principle of the Bill, and one of its three conditions was that it should only apply to urban districts Even in those districts there would often be considerable dimcultv in finding accommoda- tion for scholars whose parents did not wish them to receive denominational teaching, In rural districts that difficulty would be enor- mously increased. The Government considered it impossible to give free facilities for denomi- national education in single school areas. Mr ABEL SMITH considered no logical dis- tinction could be drawn between urban and rural districts with equal populations. Mr J. REDMOND complained that under this clause one-half of the Catholic schools would be excluded from the operation of the clause. He wished to know what was to become of these schools. Mr YOXALL believed the amendment, if adopted, would tend to multiply the number of small schools in the country? That would mean inemciency. He hoped the Government would stand fast. They had already con- ceded too much. Colonel WILLIAMS saw no reason why the children in the country should not have the same treatment asthe children in the town. Mr LOUGH (Parliamentary Secretary of the Board of Education) said that 91 per cent. of the Catholic children of thecountry would be included under this clause. The House of Com- mons need not have looked at the Bill if the Government had given special facilities to Catholics which it did not extend to other denominations. Mr SALTER said the impression had got abroad that the clause was jerrymandered by the Government and theP'ssentcrs in order to give as large a bribe as possible to the Roman Catholics while giving as small a relief as pos- sible to the Church of England. Tne SOLICITOR-GENERAL hoped that under Clause 5 religious education would con- tinue to be given as amply as hitherto. Sir WM. ANSON satd.he knew of a rural parish with 10.000 inhabitants. On the otbe- hand the borough of Matdstone had no pro- vided schools, and therefore would be deprived of the facilities under Claused. Mr JOSEPH WALTON (Liberal) agreed that where thera was more than one class of school in a rural area the same facilities ought to be given as were conferred by the clause upon urban areas. (Opposition cheers.) Be. tween such areas and smgie-school aj-eas, how- ever, he considered that there was a great gulf ?r T. P O'CONNOR s? ?s Catholics were nerfectly willing that in areas where there was only one school the exclusive control of re. ligious education should not be placed in the hands of one denomination. Protestants in Catholic Schoots. Mr BIRRELL said it was matter of univer- .it regret f any nuniber of schools worth sneaking of should be excluded from this four-ntths clause. He wished every Catholic school was in a position to come within the 1 benents of the clause, and it was satisfactory to know that the cla'ise would secure very re- markable results. In his opinion the clause secured the largest amount of benefit with the smallest amount of disadvantage. There was a difference between the country atmosphere and the town atmosphere, and the Government thought they had arrived at the best possible way of distinguishing between the two areas. Hewas astonished at thenumber of Protestant children sent to Catholic schools, but he found they were sent there because of the excellent and special trai nmg they rec-cived. Further he believed that the parents of these children would certainly support an application or extended facilities, and that wa? why he thought that half of the Catholics schools would not. b? excluded by this clause. (Ministerial cheer?.) Mr BALFOUR twitted the Government on the half-hearted support which several of their supporters had given to the clause. It was perfectly obvious that the sole reason why the is Government had introduced this arbitrary dis- tinction between areas was that it was only by doing so that the Government could effect a great deal for the Church of Rome and a great deal of injury to the Church of Engiand (Opposition cheers.) It was another proot of the fact that the Bill was a deliberate blow at the Church of England schools. It was gratui- tous persecution. (Opposition cheers.) The Committee divided on Mr Cave s amend- ment, which was rejected by 344 to 186- majority against 158. 'The debate was adjourned. In the House of Commons on Wednesday. Dr. MACNAMARA a.sked the President of the Board of Educr -Ion what securtttes. if any, it was proposed to take to secure that &ny school contracted out under his amendment to Clause 4 of the Education Bill should not fall below the level of educational emciency demanded of the provided schools in the same area. Mr BIRRELL: It would seem that the pro. visions of the code. as for instance Article 25 (B). will effectually secure what the hon. mem. ber refers to. Dr. MACNAMARA asked the President of the Board of Education whether any school contracted out under his amendment to Clause 4 of the Education Bill would he permitted to fall back to the system of one-man manage- ment, and if not, whether he could say what arrangements, if any, it was proposed to ba.ke in respect to the management of such school. Mr BIRRELL The Government are most anxious to avoid any posribiHty of these schools falling back into a condition of things in which their management is in the hands of one individual. It is atready laid down in Article 51 (B) of the code as a condition of the payment of grants that every public elementary school not maintained by a local education authority must have a responsible body of managers. This article continues in the code, and as it will appty to the schools referred to by the hon. member I think adequate security is provided against the danger to which he refers Dr. MACNAMARA Will the local authority managers Lie continued in office ? Mr BIRRELL No I do not think that. Lord BALCARRES Will the Government amendments on the paper re-establish a posi- tion analogous to the old boards of managers ? Mr BIRRELL No I do not think so. Lord ROBERT CECIL: Docs the right hon. gentleman consider that a State-aided school will be a public elementary school Mr BIRRELL: That is a point which I think is in doubt at the present time. (Opposi- tion cheers.) Probably it may be necessary to make the legislation to which I refer. If it is a pubfi" elementary school, of course the con- ditions of the code would apply to them. If it should not be there might be a gap in that respect, and I would have to see that it was altered. In reply to Mr Balfour. Mr BIRRELL said that appeal to thf Board of Education under Oause 4 of the Education Bill was intended to apply only to the case of existing schools. Committee Stage Resumed. Committee Stage Resumed. The House went into Committee on the Education Bill. the discussion of Clause 4 (the special facilities," or four-fifths clause) being resumed by Mr VILLIERS, who moved a verbal amend- ment. which he explained would enable the local authorities to give side by side with the special religious teaching to be given by the de- nominations ordinary Cowper-TempIc instruc- tion. Mr BIRRELL was unable to accept the amendment. On a division the amendment was rejected by 344 to 87. The BaHot. Mr BIRRELL moved to insert words pro- viding that the wishes of the parents should be ascertained by a ballot taken in accordance with regulations made for the purpose by the Board of Education. Mr HALFOUR did not raise any abstract objection to the proposed method. It seemed to him, however, that the matter was left too vague, because there was nothing to secure that the mechanism for taking the ballot would be fair. Mr DILLON said it was impossibte to come to a final decision on the amendment until the Committee knew what sort of a question would be put to the parents, and who would conduct the ballot. Mr S. T. EVANS said the question that would be raided at this ballot was not an issue between the parties, and it must he remem- bered that it was not to be decided by a majority of those who went to the poil, because the clause said that at least four-tifths of tho parents must desire the facilities. It was a perfectly simple situation. The clause allowed people who had strong views to claim these special facilities, and the least they could do if they asked for these facilities was to express their desire by ballot. If in a school of 100 scholars 80 of the parents desired these facili- ties, they could have them. subject to this. that it must be shown that there was school accommodation in the district for all those who had not expressed their desire to have these facilities. That was the situation as he understood it. Any other would be grossly unfair. (Ministerial cheers.) Mr PERKS thought the discussion showed that the more the clause was examined the more absurd it would appear to be. Mr BIRRELL replied that the opposition of the last speaker to the clause was so genuine that, he would no doubt find objections in each line of it. The discussion showed that the Government had been wise to leave the matter to be si-' tled by regulations. He agreed that it was desirable those regulations should be in the hands of the House before the final stage of the Bill. As to the question to be put to the parents it had always been in the mind of the Government, that it should be a statutory one, and thus the same in all districts. It had also always been the Government that the majority of the children ehottM deter- mine the question. Sir E. CARSON asked whether parents meant both parents or only one. Mr BIRBELL It means the responsible parent within the meaning of the Act of i870. Lord ROBERT CECIL regretted the intro. duction of the ballot. He could not help think ing it was proposed to appease those who re- garded the parson of the parish as a dragon who went about seeking whom he might devour. He desired to know whether those parents who abstained from voting were to be taken as not desiring special facilities. Mr BIRRELL If the poll shows that 80 out of 100 desire denominational teaching. then it will have to be shown that there is! accommodation for the 20 elsewhere. They then it will have to be shown that there is accommodation for the 20 elsewhere. They must be considered, if they do not care sum- ciently about the matter to vote, as not desiring denominational teaching. Mr WYNDHAM pointed out that parents might be prevented from voting by sickness or other reasons. Mr DILLON thought the proposition put forward was the most extraordtnary he had ever listened to. Would the right hon. gentle- man, he asked, be willing that all those who abstained from voting during the recent elec. tion in his constituency should be counted as not desiring him as their representative? (Opposition cheers.) MrASQUITH stated that bbe intention of the Government was in the interests of accuracy and fairness, and to avoid pressure nf all kinds to introduce the machinery of the ballot. It might be that the ballot might not be conclusive of the opinion of those who wanted facilities. It was desirable, therefore, that opportunity should be given to those persons who had not balloted either through illness or neglect to express their wishes at the public inquiry which the local authority was empowered to hold to ascertain the feelings of the parents. The amendment was agreed to. Mr BAL- FOUR suggesting that the Committee should not then divide, but take a precise issue later. Reasonabte Number." Mr EVELYN CECIL moved toomibthe four-fifths conditions in order to give power to local authorities to grant the special facilities if a reasonable number of parents desired them. Mr BIRRELL asked the hon. member to be good enough to tell the Committee what was a, reasonable number." Mr CECIL repled that it would be ascer- tained by the local authority. Mr BIRRELL did not think that was a reasonable suggestion. Parliament must assume some responsibility in this matter, and it was for Parliament to determine the conditions upon which these denominational privileges were to be accorded. The Government had chosen a proportion which in their judgment seemed that the school which was to have the extended facilities was overwhelmingly denominational in its character. Dr. Jobnson had said, It is not that the dog dances well the wonder is that it dances at all." So it was with Clause 4. It was not a good de- nominational clause, he agreed, but the wonder was that it should be in the Bill. Its presence could only be justified by making it perfectly clear from first to last that it was a highly exceptional clause dealing with highly exceptional circumstances. Mr BUTCHER said that however well dis- guised this four-nfths condition was it was only another way of saying that a large proportion of the denominational schools were to be ex eluded. Mr LANE FOX said the Opposition were powerless, and they could only leave it to the powerless, and they could only leave it to the House of Lords to remodel the clause—(Minis- terial cries of Oh ")—unfit the elements of justice appeared in it. (Opposition cheers.) Mr Birrell's Confession. Mr Power, Viscount Morpeth, and Mr Wm. Redmond continued the 4&Cscussion, and in reply to the last-named. Mr BIRRELL said he most nrmly believed that those Protestant parents, who sent their children, for wc!l.denned, comprehensible reasons, to Roman Catholic schools were so convinced of the excellence of those schools that they would be found exercising the ballot in favour of the continuance of the denominational character of the schools. A child of his own attended for many years a Roman Catholic school, and received the ut- most kindness there. He was now in New Zealand, and so far as he could discover he Was the strongest Protestant of the family. (Laughter.) If he (Mr Bin-ell) had been called Upon to exercise the referendum in this matter ?""st his child was at school, he would most certainly have expressed his desire that the school should continue as it was. He could not hold out any hope that the four-Qfths proportion would be reduced. Mr Chamberlain's Retort. M'' CHAMBERLAIN said he had always understood that the object ot establishing de- nouuntional schools, and especially Roman ?atnohc schools, was to promote in the minds or tne children attachment to the denomina- nonatrehgion. He confessed he did not know on what authority th.e right hon. gentle- man imagined there would be no ?mpPrmg in a Catholic school with the TTn?r? character of Protestant children. ?e (Mr Chamberlain) would have thought that the atmosphere of such a schoo! would tend to sap the Protestant character of a boy. At. all events he doubted very much whether the right hon gentleman s son would now support the F ??"? ? ?? ? advanced. (Laugh- ter. ) The omctal Opposition entirely repudiated the posttion of the Nationalist members. He regretted there had not been full reciprocity on the part ofthelnsh members. At least the I Church of England should be entitled to the same justice. He said for himself, speaking as a, Dnitarian, that he did not attach so great im- portance as many of his friends did to denomi- national teaching. (Ministerial cheers.) With the experience he had of the working cusses of this country he thought the bulk of those classes were not so greatly interested as many people supposed in the sectarian side of the question. (Ministerial cheers.) That was not a new statement. There was one basis on which they could safely appeal to the de- mocracy. and that was the eternal principles of common justice. (Ministerial cheers.) He opposed this Bill because he thought it unjust, and no part of it was more unjust than this particular limitation of four- fifths which had been ingeniously introduced in order to include as many as possible of the Catholic schools and exclude as many as possible of the AngHcan schools. Do you think," continued .Mr Chamberlain, that when sooner or later this matter is carried again to the country, as it wil! be—(Opposition cheers)— tbat you can persuade working men. who care nothing whatever for denominational teaching. that that is a just arrangement which allows to Catholic schools in the proportion of three- fourths certain privileges and withholds it Jrom three-fourths of the Anglican and Pro- testant schools ? If you do, I think you witt fmd yourselves very much mistaken. (Opposi- tion cheers.) How cou!d they distinguish be- tween one parent and another, and deny to some what they granted to others ? They would not be able to prevent the eJectors following that argument to its conctusions, and from saying that a. Government which sup- ported such inequalities must have had some object and intention quite dilTf'rent from that which was avowed on the face of their proceedings. (Renewed Opposition cheers.) The proposition before them in the Bill was 3.bso)utely indennab.e. He knew no poticy of this kind could possibly aNord anything in the nature of a permanent settlement. He did not threaten hon. gentlemen opposite with what might be done elsewhere, except that sooner or later they would have to carry their mandate back again. They would have to go to the people whom they said gave them their man. date. (Opposition cheers and counter cheers.) Of course he would very much like to see an opportunity. (Laughter and cheers.) He noticed the other day Dr. Clifford, whose personal acquaintance he did not enjoy, but who ap- peared to spea k of him generally by his Chris tianname—(much laughter)—said at a public meeting that they all knew what "Joey" wa.nted. (Much laughter, in which Mr Cham- berlain joined.) Ho (Mr Chamberiain) woutd have thought that in common with most pfopic be (Mr Chamberlain) had had. enough of elections. He was not certain Dr. Clifford knew all he (Mr Chamberlain) wanted, but he was quite right if he thought he wanted a General Election on this potnt as soon as possible. He really almost challenged hon. gentlemen opposite to agree with him that whatever might be the I psult of the General Election it would not constitute any more than th? vote did yesterday anything like a unanimous approval of a policy which on the face of it was unjust. unreasonable. unfair, and could not bo defended. (Loud Opposition cheers.) On a division the amendment was rejected by 312 to 142 majority, 170. Sir T. ESMONDE moved r.n amendment that in ascertaining whether the requisite four-Sfths m&jority existed account should be taken onJy of those parents who voted in the ballot Mr BIRRELL refused. It was the whole se(}ce of the Government's proposal that facilities could only be obtained by the given expression of the desire on the part of the parents of a certain proportion of the children. After iu.rther discussion the amendment was negatived by 295 to 158. Universa) Fac!Hties. Sub-section B. of the c)ause requires that before granting for denominational teaching the special, tacihties the local education authority sha,H be satisfied that there is public school accommodation in other schoots for the children whose parents do not desire the facilities. Lord ROBERT CECIL moved the first of a series of amendments which, be explained, would permit the facilities to be granted if there was accommodation for the children whose parents did not desire denominational teaching in some part of the school or in some other schools. I Mr CHAMBERLAIN said the proposal before the Committee was for universal facili- ties. and by no one had that been more fre- quently advocated than by himself. He joined in pressing upon the Government the accept- ance of that solution of the question. Mr BIRRELL aajd that was a proposal which the Government could not accept. The ance of that solution of the question. Mr BIRRELL aajd that was a proposal which the Government could not accept. The intention of Clause 4 was that the facilities should not be extended unless there was in the area where the four-fifths schoo! was set up public schoot accommodation for the children whose parents did not desire denOlninational teaching for them.' The clause did not require that a minority of one-fifth should be turned out of a- four-Sftbs I school if that minority wished to sts.y. but it should h&ve a. school to go to- There was no de- sire on the part of the Government to intro- duce into the four-iifths school against the sire on the part of the Government to intro- duce into the four-iifths school against the wish of the owners or trustees what was caiied Cowpe r-Tempteism. Mr BALFOUR dec tared that since the Gov- ernment bad set to work to amend the clause it had become absolutely unintelligible. (Opposition cheers.) Why was it neCtsary to go to the cost of nndiug accommodation for the minority elsewhere ]f there was satisfac- tory accommodation in the four-fifths schools ? Why sbouid the denomina.tionat character of the scbooi be destroyed merely because there was not accommodation elsewhere for the mmohty if that minority woutd be perfectty happy and content with facilities for receiving its own peculiar teaching within the walls of the four-fifths school ? At 10.30, according to the resolution of the House, the guillotine fell. and the Chairman forthwith put the amendment, which was re- jected by 367 to JjJ1 majority. 170. Government Amendments. A division Waf; also taken on the Government amendment proposing that extended facilities shoutd not be afforded except where the use of the schoolhouss was given or the schoolhouse was transferred to the local education authorities free of any rent or other payment. The figures were :—For, 360 against, 200 majority 160. The addition to the clause proposed by the Government givng the owners of a schoolhouse the right of appeal to the Board of Education in case the loca) authority refused to make an arrangement, and enabling the school to be contracted out. or in other words, to become State aided, was carried by 318 to 161—majority 157. The Opposition also challenged another Government amendment, which gives the parents of at least 20 children attending a. transferred Voluntary school if aggrieved by the mode in which extended facilities are aSorded power to appeal to the Board of Education and enables the Board to allow the school to continue as State-a'ded. The figures were :—For. 392 against. 156 majority. 236.. The Government proposed that no coud should be reckoned as attending a school unless he attended with due regularity for at least six months was carried by 444 to US majority 326. ? < On the motion that Clause 4 stand part of the Bill a further division was challenged, and resulted in there voting For the clause. 415 Against ?S Government majority. 277 On Clause 5, the Government amendment declaring that there should be no r ght of appeal to the Board of Education m the event of the local authority refusing to take over and grant extended facilities to a Voluntary school ( oming into existence after the passing of the Act was carried by 352 to 182 majority. 170. Clause 5 as amended was agreed to. In Committee of Ways and Means a resolu- tion authorising a grant of Bl.000,000 for the purposes of the Education Bill was carried without a, division and reported to the House.