know, and as must be the case in every large city, a certain amount of offensive matter which had to be moved from place to place. This particular occupation was not a very profitable or pleasant one, and it was sometimes a very dangerous one for those engaged in it. Everybody would agree that these operations ought to be carried out under conditions which would render no man liable to be be harassed, endangered, or imprisoned, and the object of the Bill was to unify the sanitary areas over which these operations were carried on. In consequence of the sanitary area not being unified great inconvenience resulted. Supposing there was a load of insanitary matter put into a barge at Teddington Lock and its destination was Tilbury, under the law as it now stood the barge man took his barge load and reached Barking, and if the hours expired during which he might remove this offensive matter he had, before he could move again under the regulations of the County Council, to remain there twenty-four hours or risk fine or imprisonment. He thought that men who performed this useful and evil-smelling work ought to be protected, and the time had arrived when all the authorities had agreed that the regulations of the Connty Council and of the police should be unified and that these men should be enabled to carry out their work in a proper way. The hon. Member was mistaken about the alteration of the hours. The rule now was that offensive matter could only be moved between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. and the proposal of this Bill was that the hours should be from 6 a.m. to 12 noon. The reason for the change was that if offensive matter were removed between 8 o'clock at night and 6 o'clock in the morning that was the period of darkness, and for a sanitary operation of this nature daylight was, in the opinion of the police, indispensable. The hon. Member talked about people in the suburbs being inconvenienced, but what now happened was that under the cover of fog or darkness this offensive matter was deposited sometimes on the forecourt, or gardens of suburban residences, which could not be done if the police were able to keep their eye upon the men who did it, as they would have an opportunity of doing in daylight. This Bill would give equal rights to everybody engaged in the removal of offensive matter, and they had a right to see that these men Mr. John Burns. | got just and proper treatment in carrying out this offensive work. He had expected the hon. Member to quote the poot Coleridge in regard to Cologne, in which place he said he counted seven and twenty different smells, which were all well-defined and separate stinks. In London we had not seven and twenty smells, but we had several well-defined ind separate stinks, and in order to get rid of them he hoped the House would give the Government the Second Reading of this Bill. MR. CLAUDE HAY said that after the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman, he would ask leave to withdraw his Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Main Question put, and agreed to. Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next. An Asterisk (*) at the commencement of a Speech indicates revision by the Member. HOUSE OF LORDS. PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS. Ure Elder Fund Order Confirmation Bill (H.L.]. A Bill to confirm a Provisional Order relating to the Ure Elder FundWas presented by the Earl Beauchamp (for the Lord Hamilton of Dalzell); read 1; to be printed; and (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, Section 7) deemed to have been read 2; and reported from the Committee. (No. 227.) PETITIONS. EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) Petition for Amendment of; of inhabitants of parish of Ross; read, and ordered to lie on the Table. EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL. Petition against; of inhabitants of parish of Nailstone; read, and ordered to lie on the Table. TRADE DISPUTES BILL. Petitions for Amendment of; of employers of labour in Aberdeen' and district (signing); employers of labour in Yorkshire (signing); and Birmingham Chamber of Commerce; Read, and ordered to lie on the Table. RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC. COLONIES: ANNUAL. LUNACY. Report to the Lord Chancellor of the number of visits made, the number of patients seen, and the number of miles travelled by the visitors of lunatics, pursuant to the Lunacy Act, 1890, between 1st April and 30th September, 1906. SHOP HOURS ACT, 1904 (HEBDEN Order made by the council of the West Riding of Yorkshire, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the hours of closing for certain shops within the district. Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table. THE MILITIA. *THE EARL OF WEMYSS rose to call attention to "the altering of the terms of service in the Militia by rendering them liable to be sent abroad at the will of the alike to the Militia and the nation, as it Government of the day, a change hurtful would lessen the chances of recruiting a force, ever from 20,000 to 30,000 short of its established strength, though containing a very large number of boys. under twenty years of age, while the exercise of the existing power of compulsory Militia Home Service would be rendered impossible." The noble Earl said: My Lords, I have, in the first place, to apologise for the delay there has been on my part in bringing on this Notice, but I postponed it, by request, because it was wished that nothing should come between the House and the late discussion on the Education Bill. As regards Army reform, we are No 512. Southern Nigeria (Report for not in a position to know exactly what 1905). Mr. Haldane intends. We are not to 3 F But the main thing is that, according to Mr. Haldane, this Army is to be "on purely British principles." I want to know what those purely British principles are. I imagine that in Mr. Haldane's view they mean purely volunteering and nothing in the shape of compulsion. My noble friend the My noble friend the Under-Secretary of State for War gives no sign either of approval or disapproval. I assume, therefore, that purely British principles mean purely voluntary principles. I traverse that statement absolutely. I say that purely British principles are the reverse, that purely British principles are compulsion in the Militia for Home defence. It is true that this power of compulsion has been long in abeyance, but it exists, and every year Parliament passes a Bill to suspend the action of the Militia ballot. Therefore, I am justified in asserting that Mr. Haldane is inaccurate in saying that this scheme rests on purely British principles. On the other hand, his Army Reform scheme rests on absolutely un-British principles. There is no denial. Now I come to my Motion. My Motion is in two parts. The first refers to the alteration of the terms of service in the Militia. Service in the Militia at present is voluntary, but militiamen may be sent anywhere throughout the world if they volunteer. By the change which is proposed the terms of service are to be altered, and militiamen are to be rendered liable to be sent abroad at the will of the Government of the day. That is a great upheaval of the traditions on which our military system rests. Why is this change made? I contend that without any change such as this you can get all You have only to ask the Militia. If the Government said, "We want a certain number of regiments, we ask you to volunteer," what would be the result Every regiment would volunteer. That is a certainty, and then you would have to select from the whole the number that you required. Therefore, why, in Therefore, why, in God's name, upset the foundation of our military system when there is no necessity The Earl of Wemyss. you want. for it? This appears to me to be the common sense of the thing. ranean. Take the history of the Militia. Have they ever failed you when you wanted them? Did they fail you in the Peninsula? Did they fail you at Waterloo ? Did they fail you in the Indian Mutiny? It is true that they did not go to India, but they went to the MediterCrimea? No. And did they fail you in the At the time of the Crimea they garrisoned Malta and be Spain, Waterloo, the Crimea, India, Gibraltar. On any occasion, whether it or, lastly, South Africa, have they ever failed you? No. Have they ever objected in any way or refused to respond to your invitation? They have not. Therefore I say you are, without any possible justification, breaking up the foundations of our military system, which rests upon a Militia raised compulsorily for Home defence according to the old constitutional power. The power of forcing men to serve in the Militia for Home defence only is a power that it seems to me something like madness willingly to throw away; but, if the terms of service are altered in the way proposed, you practically throw it away, because you cannot establish the principle of compulsion to send men to Egypt, to West Africa, to Timbuctoo, or anywhere else. Therefore, my Lords, a great power will be done away with if this change is made. I go further. You will put the Britishborn man in a more abject position with regard to compulsion than either a Frenchman or a German. In the French army, which is recruited absolutely by compulsion, you cannot send a man to else abroad against his will and consent. Algiers, to Madagascar, or anywhere The same thing obtains as regards Germany. In Germany also, they have to obtain the consent of the men, although they are recruited by compulsion, before sending them to German possessions abroad. That does away with the argument that it is unfair that men As reshould be asked to volunteer. gards that point, in your divsion of the Militia those who do not wish to go abroad would remain in the Home Department. Therefore, all these arguments fall to the ground, and we come to this, that the only recruiting, said "I have slowly and most unwillingly arrived at the conclusion that here again our true policy is to return to the old traditional system, and to the practical execution of the law as it now stands. sure basis on which you can build a mili- | bearing. Mr. Herbert, in a circular letter tary system is by compulsion for Home to the Cabinet, speaking of Militia defence. Unless England adopts this, it had better do what I heard the other day was done in the case of the Bishop of Osnaburg. That Bishop was one of those potentates who had a little army before the union of the German States, and that army bore on its helmets the words " Give us peace, O Lord! Now, my Lords, we know the changes in uniform to which our soldiers are subject, and I would suggest that as our army organisation now is, our soldiers should get another new cap in the shape of Mr. Haldane's cone with the Osna-land. By merely abstaining from an excepburg prayer upon it. were That was the law as it stood then, and as it stands now, i.e., the ballot. "With our jealousy of a standing Army we have never permitted conscription for the Queen's Forces, but time out of mind we have ruled that all males capable of bearing arms are liable to be called upon for the defence of their country. The ballot is now the law of the tional proceeding with a view to its suspension, the ballot comes into operation." And his biographer, at page 396, says— 66 of establishing the Militia on what he thought a Disappointed though he was in his hopes proper footing, Mr. Herbert never abandoned the intention of ultimately effecting what he desired, and never ceased to insist on the importance of recognising the Militia as the great reserve force of the nation, second only in importance to the Regular Army, though to be used for home service and home service only." Now, in expressing the views which I have laid before your Lordships as regards compulsory Home Service I have not been stating my own opinion only. Who, then, are the authorities who looked upon the enforcement of our constitutional annually suspended law of compulsory service in the Militia as the only sure solution of our present difficulties? I wrote in the autumn four letters to the Scotsman, in one of which I pointed out this is very valuable testimony. These Coming from such a man as Mr. Herbert that the authorities numbered ten, and are the opinions of the past. Have I (1) Lord Sidmouth (Militia Trans-none as regards the present? I wrote to fer Bill), 1807; (2) Sir James Grahame's Lord Wolseley, that distinguished soldier, Committee on Army Organisation, 1860; asking him to come and give me a hand (3) Recruiting Commission, 1867; (4) in this matter, and I received this letter Lord Dalhousie, 1867; (5) Lord Long- in reply. Upon its receipt I wrote to ford, 1867; (6) Sir James Scarlet, 1870; Lord Wolseley, asking him if he had any (7) Colonel Anson, 1870; (8) Sir W. Mans- objection to my making use of it in your field (Lord Sandhurst) 1871; (9) Lord Lordships' House, and he replied that he Wolseley, 1903; (10) County and urban had no objection whatever. I will, authorities, 1903. I will not trouble therefore, read what Lord Wolseley says. your Lordships with what those authori- He wroteties said, but they all, as strongly as possible, insisted that if you are to have an Army at all, it must be built on a sure foundation, and the only sure foundation is compulsory service under the existing law. From this list there was one omission, and I did not know of it until a few days ago. I refer to the views of Mr. Herbert, who was Minister for War in 1851. I happened to turn to his life, a most interesting book, which is written by Lord Stanmore, to see if anything was said about the Militia, and I found the following passage, which, coming from the Minister for War of the day, ought to have a material request it contains, but I am not equal to the "I feel much flattered by your note and the attempt. England can never have an efficient Army, during peace, and she must, therefore, accept the rebuffs and calamities which are always in store for the nation that is content to follow the breed of cowards who usually direct her great affairs. The day will inevitably lose her former fighting renown to such an come when she will violently and suddenly unmistakeable extent that the plucky fishwives will march upon Downing Street, and, if they can catch its usual inmates, will rend them. One Party is as bad as the other, and I hope and pray when the national misfortune of a great defeat at sea overtakes us followed by the invasion of that John Bull will turn and rend the jawers England or Ireland-very possibly the latterand talkers who prevent us from being prepared to meet invasion. It is not Mr. Haldane Î find that Besides these opinions and the opinion of Lord Wolseley, we know that Lord Roberts is strongly of opinion that you must have compulsion for home defence. Then there is the Duke of Norfolk's Commission. What was that Commission appointed for? It was appointed to look into the efficiency of the Auxiliary Services, the Militia and the Volunteers, and what did the Commissioners report? They reported that these services, as at present constituted, are not to be trusted. And yet Mr. Haldane takes the Volunteers as the base of his cone. fault with. He acts more suo, or I should rather | dence or in Party was made during those two say, after the manner of all of our War days." Ministers. It is the British people who are to blame, who prefer the politicians, who pretend to scoff at the possibility of invasion, and refuse, in their stuck-up folly, to regard the warnings which the great Duke left this nation as a legacy. Mr. Tobias Jones, M.P., and the Smiths and Robinsons, all busy to make money, profess to laugh at danger, and ignorant John Bull makes haste to admire their wisdom. However, he would not listen to our great fight ing Duke, so poor fry like me must content our selves with the silly, selfish prayer of 'Not in our time, oh Lord." The mob who now rule England are taught by their leaders to regard men like you and me who would warn them of their danger as male Cassandras; at any rate, they won't believe us. The people prefer those who assure them of Peace, perfect peace!' The invasion of England has been at all times a favourite military problem with me. I have studied it in all its phases since the day, when, as a boy, I cut from the newspaper the warning contained in the Duke of Wellington's letter to Sir John Burgoyne on this serious subject. However, the Navy, always afraid their building programme for the year may be cut down, keep assuring John Bull that England is quite secure as long as her Navy is powerful. I should like to see our Navy half again as strong as it is, but still, to be quite secure against invasion, we require a strong defensive Army also. Our great Duke said that England was As against the authorities I have ventured to quote, what is there to be said? Nothing. The Party politician knows as well as possible that every word I have read to the House is true; that every opinion given by generals and other experts, that you cannot have a sound system unless it i. on a sound basis, with compulsion for home defence, is true. That is known full well. As regards Mr. Haldane, I hope I have said nothing to give him offence. Certainly nothing would be further from my wish of that is that I have in my hand a letter The best proof I can give which I wrote to Mr. Haldane on the 1st of January last, the substance of which was that all his predecessors had failed. Why? For want of courage to ask Lord Wolseley referred to the Navy. for those compulsory powers which That leads me to say a word about that the Government have and ought to line of defence. Mr. Haldane has plunged⚫ercise. now joined to France by an Isthmus of steam."" The other letters that I have received are more or less in the same strain, but the opinion I have just read is one of the best opinions you could have at the present time on the necessity of our Army for home defence. head over heels into the blue water. He followed Mr. Balfour's example, and he is floating about in it now, and boasts of it. Last week there was a discussion at the United Service Institution on the question of the efficiency of the Navy, and Mr. Bellairs, a naval man and a Member of Parliament, read a paper thereon. Admiral Harris was in the chair, and among those present were Admiral Freemantle and a great many soldiers and civilians. Here is an account which a gentleman who was present has given me of this meeting "During a two days debate last week, not only the lecturer but also every speaker, naval, military, legal, and lay, most definitely asserted that we were courting future naval disaster, and that Tweed mouth's Navy would prove as broken a red as Haldane's Army. Not one attempt to justify our present trust in ProviThe Earl of Wemyss. than to do so. That was the tone of the letter I wrote to him. I said they talked about the problem of the Army, but there was no problem. The problem is simply this: There is my hat; I want to cover my head. I have only to stretch out my hand and put it on. You have this Militia power. You have only to use it and your problem is absolutely solved. But there is not the courage to do it. I hope the Government will think very seriously before they touch the foundation of our military system; that they will think seriously before they alter the terms of service in the Militia, because, if they do alter it, they will lose for ever the power of compulsion for Home defence, however much we may need it in the future. This House last year passed a very sensible and wise Resolution. It passed |