The Committee divided-Ayes, 195; Noes, 69. Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Allhusen, Aug. Henry Eden Anson, Sir William Reynell Arkwright, John Stanhope Arnold-Forster, Hugh O. Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy Bailey, James (Walworth) Balcarres, Lord Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds Blundell, Colonel Henry Boscawen, Arthur Griffith Churehill, Winston Spencer Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile AYES. Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W. Fyler, John Arthur (Division List, No. 237.) Gibbs, HnA.G.H(City of Lond Hornby, Sir William Henry Molesworth, Sir Lewis Bolton, Thomas Dolling Broadhurst, Henry Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath Pierpoint, Robert Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne | Rattigan, Sir William Henry Ritchie, Rt. Hn. C. Thomson Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich) Sturt, Hon. Humphrey Napier TELLERS FOR THE AYES. — Brown, Geo. M. (Edinburgh) Cawley, Frederick Channing, Francis Allston Fuller, J. M. F. Harmsworth, R. Leicester Levy, Maurice M'Arthur, William (Cornwall) Nussey, Thomas Willans Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) | Runciman, Walter Shipman, Dr. John G. Walton, John Lawson (Leeds,S TELLERS FOR THE NOES- Resolutions to be reported upon | columu No. 1 of the Schedule hereto Monday next. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. That they have agreed to, Rothesay Corporation Order Confirmation Bill; Scottish Episcopal Clergy Widows' and Orphans' Fund Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment. Kingston-upon-Hull Corporation Bill; Dover Corporation Bill; Hainault Forest Bill, with Amendments. Amendments to Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London) Bill [Lords]; Gas and Water Orders Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Bristol Corporation Bill [Lords]; Maryport Harbour Bill [Lords]; Manchester Corporation Bill [Lords]; Somerset and District Electric Power Bill [Lords]; Birmingham District Tramways Bill [Lords], without Amendment. NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1901-2. (Considered in Committee.) (In the Committee.) [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.] Whereas it appears by the Navy Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1902, and the statement appended thereto, as follows, viz. :-(a.) That the gross expenditure for certain Navy Services exceeded the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £205,224 2s. 6d., as shown in appended; while the gross expenditure for other Navy Services fell short of the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £220,819 4s. Id., as shown in Column No. 2 of the said appended Schedule, so that the gross actual expenditure for the whole of the Navy Services fell short of the gross estimated expenditure by the net sum of £15,595 1s. 7d.; (b.) That the receipts in aid of certain Grants for Navy Services fell short of the total estimated receipts by the sum of £89,584 Os. 11d., as shown in column No. 3 of the said appended Schedule, while the receipts in aid of other Navy Services exceeded the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £168,173 16s. 8d., as shown in Column No. 4 of the said appended Schedule, so that the total actual receipts in aid of the Grants for Navy Services exceeded the total estimated receipts by the net sum of £78,589 15s. 9d.; (c.) That the resulting differences between the Exchequer Grants for Navy Services and the net expenditure are as follows, viz. : : excess of the estimated Appropriations | Services as is necessary to cover the said in-Aid, in respect of the same services; total deficits on other Grants for Navy and have also temporarily authorised the Services. application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Navy 1. Resolved, That the application of such sums be sanctioned. 1 Wages, &c. of Officers, Seamen, and Boys, Coastguard, and Royal Marines Victualling and Clothing for the Navy 4 Medical Establishments and Services.. 9 Naval Armaments 10 Works, Buildings, and Repairs at Home and Abroad 15 ..Half-Pay, Reserved and Retired 6,314 19 7 3,704 13 11 1,445 12 9 12 6 11 Whereas it appears by the Army Ap. propriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1902, and the statement appended thereto, as follows, viz. :-(a.) That the gross expenditure for certain Army Services exceeded the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £4,796,909 14s. 11d., as shown in Column No. 1 of the Schedule hereto appended; while the gross expenditure for other Army Services fell short of the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £2,923,978 7s. 2d., as shown in Column No. 2 of the said appended Schedule; so that the gross actual expenditure for the whole of the Army Services exceeded the gross estimated net sum of ex expenditure by the £1,872,931 7s. 9d.; (b.) That the receipts in aid of certain Army Services fell short of the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £235,231 13s. 6d., as shown in Column No. 3 of the said appended Schedule; while the receipts in aid of other Army Services ceeded the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £2,362,289 3s. 8d., as shown in Column No. 4 of the said appended Schedule; so that the total actual receipts in aid of the grants for Army Services exceeded the total estimated receipts by the net sum of £2,127,057 10s. 2d. ; (c.) That the resulting differences between the Exchequer Grants for Army Services and the net expenditure are as receipts in aid of such expenditure has follows, viz. :— Total Surpluses £ s. d. 3,773,058 9 4 3,518,932 6 11 Net Surplus £254,126 2 5 And whereas by a Vote of Parliament during the present Session (House of Commons Paper, No. 255, of 1903) a further sum of £100 has been granted for the expenditure of the year 1901-2, and Number of Vot e. been sanctioned to the amount of £1,872,831 7s. 9d. And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Army Services as is necessary to cover the said total deficits on other Grants for Army Services. 2. Resolved, That the application of the appropriation of additional such sums be sanctioned. £75,392,969 be granted out of the Con- narrow commercial interest-sugar refinsolidated Fund of the United Kingdom. ing and producing-and that in itself (Mr. Elliot.) was a novelty in this House. They had been told that the interests of the Resolutions to be reported upon Monday sugar refiners depended on this Bill, but *MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.) said he did not think it would be necessary for him to detain the House for any great length, because there was no reason why he should repeat the arguments submitted at the various stages of the Bill. But the situation they had arrived at was in some respects very strange. Owing to a ruling of the Chairman of Committees, who held that it would be out of order to move Amendments not in harmony with the Convention, the House had been unable in Committee to express an opinion on the most drastic proposals of this measure. They had been unable to express any opinion on the bonding of factories, the necessity for certificates of origin with all sugar imports, and the extraordinary position to which Parliament would be reduced by the permanent Commission appointed under the Convention. The country had been secretly committed by the Government to all these proposals. He thought that that was unprecedented in the history of the commercial law in this country. At this last stage he asked the Committee to look back and inquire what was the origin of this Bill? Many people thought that the Colonial Secretary was the originator of this Bill, for, of course, it was an open secret that the Colonial Secretary controlled not only his own Department, but the Foreign Office, the Treasury, and the Board of Trade, and indeed every Department of the Government. None of the permanent officials in these great Departments of the State approved of the Convention, but they were forced by the imperious will of the Colonial Secretary to carry out its policy. The important thing, however, for the House to see was that the Colonial Secretary was not the originator of the Bill. The Bill had its origin in a He the debates had exploded that theory. The sugar refining industry in this country had not declined. It was now as great and probably far more profitable than ever it was. Therefore, they did not find any basis in the sugar refining industry for this drastic legislation. The Colonial Secretary had used the language of the greatest exaggeration in referring to this industry when he said that if it had developed as it should have developed. it would have given employment to tens of thousands, if not to hundreds of thousands of people. What was the truth of the matter? We at present refined 40 per cent. of the sugar introduced into this country, and that gave employment to 2,418 men; if we refined the whole of the sugar therefore, that would only find employment for 6,000 men. Why, there were many single factories all over the country which employed as many men as that. mentioned that to show the great exaggeration in which the Colonial Secretary indulged; in fact, the figures produced by the Colonial Secretary showed that he was totally ignorant of the commercial affairs of the country. The refining interest was a small, a narrow, and a petty interest. Its want of development was due to the fact that it was much more economical to complete the process of refining where sugar was produced. He therefore dismissed the interests of refiners as really not affected by the Bill. The other interest was that of the West Indies, which only sent three out of every 100 lbs. of sugar to the British consumer. Sir Neville Lubbock was the real originator of the Bill. That gentleman, who was a West Indian producer, had pressed this policy eloquently and consistently for the last thirty years. Twenty years ago the Colonial Secretary refused to accept his programme, but now he had capitulated, and the credit for this new legislation belonged entirely to Sir Neville Lubbock and one or two other representatives of West Indian producers. The Colonial Secretary had said that this Sugar Convention would give stability to the price of sugar, but that was only another way of saying that it would make sugar dearer to the British consumer. |