to consider the giving out of mail con- might be who received less than the tracts between this country and the current rate of wages paid to EnglishEast. The hon. Member said the men. The hon. Member based his case present system took away all control on the Fair Wages Resolution of the over the contracts from the House of House. But it was a little doubtful Commons, and that contracts ought to how far Lascar seamen were affected by lie on the Table of the House.

that Resolution. The railways of the MR. PROVAND, interposing, said country received heavy subsidies as well his point was that the tenders when as the mail packet service, and if the received should be submitted to a Com- Fair Wages Resolution was to be applied mittee of the House, which should con- to every service in any way subsidised sider them with the Post Office and or paid by the Government it must be settle the terms. His complaint was applied to the railways of the kingdom. that the House knew nothing of the contracts until they were laid on the Table the night before they were voted on, and the Votes were taken in the middle of the night.

If they were to deal with this question from the point of view of the Fair Wages Resolution, how would it work out? The vessels started in one direction from England and in the other from India, *MR. HANBURY said, one of the and the English sailors (if any) were hon. Member's complaints was that the no doubt paid the wages current in contract for mails for the East was so their trade. The point was whether often given to the P. and O. Company. the wages current in the trade in The forms of tender had been the same England should apply to men starting for some years and must be known to from India and who were natives the hon. Member. It should be known of India. If that were done, it must that effect could only be given to the shut out all the latter from employmail contracts by a Resolution of the ment in this service. Would it be fair House, and therefore he did not see how in this way indirectly to exclude their the House could have greater control British fellow-subjects? ["Hear, hear!"] than it already possessed. With regard They must recollect, too, that a large to the employment of Lascars, he was portion of this subsidy-namely, someglad that the hon. Member for Battersea thing like £72,000-and, therefore, a did not raise the question as one of pre- large part of the wages of the sailors, judice against coloured races. The was paid by India. In these circumGovernment could not agree to the stances, it would not be fair to lay exclusion of coloured labour. He be- down a rule which would shut out of lieved that no coolies were employed on the service of these vessels their fellowthe P. and O. boats, and as to Lascars, subjects in the Indian Empire. ["Hear, it would be unjust by any direct action hear!"] He had been asked how it was to exclude from the privileges of the that the P. and O. Company often got these trade of the Empire men who were contracts. He believed they were open equally the fellow-subjects of the Crown contracts, and the P. and O. Company got with ourselves. The hon. Member for them because they were the most efficient Battersea did not directly propose that and sent in the cheapest tenders. A sort Lascar labour should be excluded under of hint had been given of malignant inthe mail contracts, but the course he fluences being brought to bear to enable suggested would have the effect of ex- the contracts to be given to the P. and O. cluding them indirectly. It was said Company. He was not aware of any that they worked for lower wages than influence of the kind, and he did not Englishmen would. But they were kept believe any such influence existed. and fed all the year round instead of ["Hear, hear!"] The hon. Member being discharged at the end of a voyage for Newcastle-under-Lyme suggested as English sailors were. Because they that these contracts should be divided were not paid exactly the same wages as among all the companies running to the English sailors, were they to be excluded East. He thought that would be an from the benefits of the service? They expensive process. If they had open were of entirely different race, habits, contracts, they were entitled to give the and mode of life, and therefore they preference to the lowest tender, provided could not be treated as Englishmen the service offered was efficient. It

would be neither to the interest of the mail carrying steamers in most cases public service nor to that of economy to belonged to the Naval Reserve, but the do as the hon. Member suggested and crews under them were composed of subsidise all the steamboat lines. ["Hear, Lascars. The Chairman of the P. and O. hear!" He had answered all the points talked about mixed crews. They were not that had been raised, and he appealed to mixed in the usual sense of the word. the Committee to allow the Vote to be The Europeans on board were the officers taken. and the quartermasters, but there were *SIR CHARLES DILKE observed no European seamen on board the ships that there was one point upon which at all which were manned by Lascars. the Secretary to the Treasury had been He hoped before the contracts were resilent in his reply, and that was as re- newed some arrangement would be come garded the military argument. No doubt to between the Admiralty, the Board of it was not the right hon. Gentleman's Trade and the Treasury as to what, in business; but it was the business of the future, should be the composition of House, and the First Lord of the Ad- their crews. He quite agreed with the miralty ought to be consulted on the Secretary to the Treasury, it was immatter in that respect before the tenders possible to make any rule excluding were settled. The country had a reserve Lascars, and no doubt this matter would of really good British seamen, only in be settled by a compromise of some kind the passenger lines, which were very on that head. But when the Secretary largely mail contract companies. The to the Treasury suggested that the P. and Cunard and other lines running across O. got these contracts, as against the the Atlantic, and great lines such as Orient Line, because they were cheaper, the Orient, were the homes of good then he had to reply that that cheapness British seamen, and the nominal force was affected by the extent to which the of British sailors in the world was P. and O. relied on exclusively Lascar merely a nominal force except as far as crews, and the military argument was these great companies were concerned. one which, in this connection, ought not They were told they had great numbers to be excluded. of British seamen, but the numbers included stewards and all classes of people and even loafers. He believed he himself had once figured in these returns, because if a passenger travelled by a steamer which was not a passenger steamer, he was bound before he could so travel to ship as a member of the crew. He knew that on one occasion a distinguished Times correspondent, Miss Shaw, had been borne as a British seaman because she MR. DALZIEL hoped that they would had to ship in a non-passenger steamer hear, before the Debate closed, whether in travelling to a distant part of the the right hon. Gentleman adhered to world. The real reserve of British that statement, and that it was not a seamen was to be found in the great matter of private influence and private passenger lines. As regarded the arrangement. point further East where, undoubtedly, they whether it was desirable that Lascars might need many of these fast cruisers should be so employed. There was a suddenly in the time of war, they would very curious contradiction between the have to face the Messageries steamers, statement of the hon. Member for which were manned almost exclusively Greenock and that of the Secretary to by French men-of-war men. He was bound the Treasury. The former said it was to say, with all respect to the very not on the ground of economy these men high qualities of Lascar crews, that they were employed, but the right hon. could not look to a Lascar crew to man Gentleman on following entirely threw. one of their fast steamers in time of war over the hon. Member and said that so as to enable her to compete on equal undoubtedly there was economy in this terms with French steamers manned by matter, and that the Lascars were men-of-war men. The officers of the cheaper.

Mr. Hanbury.

MR. J. H. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs) observed that the Secretary to the Treasury had not, in his reply, stated, so far as the different companies were concerned, that the P. and O. got the particular contract after competition with opposing companies.

*MR. HANBURY: I believe that is so.

Another

was

SIR T. SUTHERLAND explained MR. DALZIEL said that he entirely that his statement was that on these agreed with the right hon. Gentleman. ships a far larger number of Lascars were The right hon. Member for Battersea employed than if the ships were manned did not claim that an undue exception by European seamen; and that the total should be made on behalf of British seaamount of wages paid on one of the men, but what he asked was that an steamers manned by a mixed crew was undue preference should not be given to larger in twelve months than if it were Lascars simply because they worked manned exclusively by Europeans. for less wages than did British seamen. MR. DALZIEL observed that after It was not a question of preference. All this explanation he could not, he was they asked was that they should have afraid, alter the view he had expressed. fair consideration in this matter. They The hon. Member said the employment of had not only not had fair consideration, these men was not defended on the ground but they had not had anything approachof economy, while the right hon. Gentle- ing it. He was told that, so far as the man said that undoubtedly the wages P. and O. were concerned, two-thirds of paid to them were less in proportion the men employed were actually Lascars; than those given to British seamen. The and here they were asked to vote a sum, right hon. Gentleman wisely said that some £360,000 of which went to this as India contributed a certain amount Company, without a word of promise of the subsidy it would be unfair to pro- from the representative of the Governhibit the employment of natives of ment that this matter was going to India. Quite so, but as the right hon. receive attention. He hoped his hon. Gentleman was willing to pay some Friend would go to a Division, and then deference to the opinion of India in the they would see how some of the hon. matter, why did he not carry out that Members opposite who, thoughout the view with regard to Australia? Whilst country increased their majorities and Australia contributed her proportion in won seats on a "British platform," the same way as India, the Australian would vote on this particular matter. people complained that their workmen *MR B. L. COHEN (Islington, E.) were practically prevented from being said he could inform the hon. Gentleman employed on board these steamers. He at once how he should vote. If the thought there was a still more important hon. Member for Battersea went to a view of this question, which was that the Division, he should vote against him. Secretary to the Treasury in a Con- He was sorry that for the first time for servative Government returned as the a great many years an effort should be representatives and champions of British made from the opposite side of the labour, should give a special pleading in House to import Party spirit and Party favour of the employment of Lascars, considerations into purely a question because he could not come to any other of administration. He was not at all conclusion. The right hon. Gentleman afraid to meet the hon. Gentleman fairly did not give one hint that this subject and squarely on the issue he had raised. would be reconsidered or that anything So far as he knew it had never been one would be done when the contracts came of the planks of the Conservative and to be considered. Thus they had the Liberal Unionist platform that they Conservatives and the Liberal Unionists, should seek to exclude from employment who in every constituency throughout by the State the subjects of any portion the country issued bills containing the of Her Majesty's dominions. It had words "British Seamen, British Boilers, British Ships," when a question was raised affecting British seamen remaining silent in this great cause.

*MR. HANBURY: I distinctly stated that coolies were not employed, that all these were British subjects, and I am not aware of any Member on this side having said anything against putting our fellow British subjects in India in possession of a share of privileges which we enjoy.

been, perhaps almost exclusively, the doctrine of the Conservative and Liberal Unionist Party to advocate Imperial interests as distinguished from anything which would tend to disruption and separation. If there was any Vote in respect of which special consideration should be given to Lascars, surely it was the Vote for that particular Companyin which he was not directly or indirectly pecuniarily interested-which had done

*THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is not entitled to repeat over again statements which he made a short time ago, or the statements which were made by another hon. Member. If the hon. Member has any fresh light to throw on the subject, he is entitled to detain the House.

so much, by the improvement of the right hon. Gentleman furnished them communication between the Indian Em- with another case, for he stated that a pire and the United Kingdom, to better private arrangement was entered into the lot of the hundreds of millions of between the Government and the HolyHer Majesty's Indian subjects. He head and Kingstown steamers just before understood his right hon. Friend to say the House rose last June. spontaneously that, although they could not, should not, and would not consent to the exclusion of Lascar labour, they did recognise that the subjects from the Australian colonies should receive their due share of employment on the lines engaged in those services. The hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had instituted a comparison between the MR. PROVAND said, he was merely Orient line and the P. and O., but he mentioning that as an illustration, given did not seem to know that the by the right hon. Gentleman himself, in Orient line carried no mails to India; support of the very complaint he made while the P. and O. not only carried mails that there had been no proper competito India, but a large portion of the mails tion before. The other complaint he for Australia were carried on those made was of the absence of opportunity, vessels which were destined for Calcutta and the right hon. Gentleman himself and Bombay. On the general question, stated, without giving any particulars, he would like to say that he thought it that a few days ago advertisements were was a little dangerous, quite apart from inserted asking for tenders. Would he the question of Lascars or British sea- tell them what those tenders were for? men, for the Government of this In reference to the observation of the country to interfere too much in hon. Gentleman opposite about Party matters of administration between em- feeling, he would remind him that he had ployers and employed. These subjects distinctly stated that he had had as much should be left to the contracting parties. He believed the duty of the Government was to let their contract on terms most advantageous to the British taxpayer, having regard to all the considerations which surrounded the granting of those contracts.

to say about those who sat below him as those who sat on the other side. He was only complaining of no proper competition being possible, because the Government in previous years had not sent out their notices in time to give all the different companies and interests the opportunity of tendering for the mail service.

MR. PROVAND said he thought he was entitled to correct one or two statements which the right hon. Gentleman SIR HOWARD VINCENT (Sheffield, had attributed to him. He said that he Central) said, he quite agreed with what had complained of the contract being fell from his right hon. Friend the Memgiven many times to the P. and O. On ber for the Isle of Thanet, that they the contrary, he did not complain of that should do nothing to prevent the employat all; though he said that, if there had ment of all British subjects in every part been complete competition, it was very of the Empire, whatever their colour likely that the P. and O. would have might be, but he should have been glad secured the contract. What he did to hear from the Secretary to the Treacomplain of was that, in giving out con- sury a rather more emphatic declaration tracts in 1877 and 1885, the Postal that the Government would do all they authorities had totally disregarded the possibly could to discourage the employrecommendation of the only Committee ment of foreign-that was, non-Britishof this House, and even considered the labour upon mail steamers receiving question, which was that ample notice Government subsidies. This was not a and full particulars of the terms and question entirely confined to the employconditions of the service required should ment of Lascars, as the right hon. be given to the public as being the Baronet (Sir Charles Dilke) showed when means most likely to secure real com- he brought forward the case of the Naval petition by responsible parties. The Reserve. It was of great importance Mr. B. L. Cohen.

that ships receiving a subsidy as Naval British subjects, and further than that Reserve steamers should be manned by he could not go. British sailors. He held in his hand a MR. BURNS explained that his Return which showed that last year motive for moving the reduction of the 10,000 foreign sailors arrived at eastern Vote was that in the subsidised mail ports, and found employment on British packets equal service did not receive ships. This showed that the Government ought to do all they possibly could to discourage the employment of foreign labour upon vessels with which they were connected, and it also showed emphatically the necessity of dealing with this subject on a broader basis, and of the Government introducing their Alien Bill as soon as possible.

equal pay, irrespective of nationality, and that the Fair Wages Resolution passed by the House of Commons was not observed in connection with the Government mail contracts.

66

*THE CHAIRMAN put the Vote, and declared in favour of the 'Ayes." MR. BURNS: No, no, Sir. We challenge the Vote on this side. Besides, I think it would be unfair and unsatisfactory if a Vote on an important matter like this could be shuffled through in such a way. ["Cries of "Order!"'] I moved a reduction of £100

66

*MR. F. S. STEVENSON (Suffolk, Eye) said, that in the Debate on this Vote dealing with mail packet service one part of the British Empire had escaped consideration altogether-Mauritius and its dependencies. The mail service with *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. MemMauritius was at present a monopoly ber is in error. No reduction has been of the Messageries Maritimes Company, moved at all. I put the Vote and which was subsidised to the extent of gathered the voices from both sides, and £6,000 a year by the colony, in addition there were no Noes," upon which I to the large subsidy which it received declared that the 'Ayes had it. from the French Government. At["Hear, hear!"] present the postal service was by no MR. BURNS: Last night I moved means of a satisfactory character, and he the reduction of the Vote by £100. wished to know whether arrangements You accepted that Motion; the Debate could not be made between the British Government and the Legislature of the Mauritius, with a view to improving, in the first place, the postal service, and in the second place to securing the employment of a larger proportion of British vessels in the transmission of the mails in question.

MR. J. M. PAULTON (Durham, Bishop's Auckland) said, he should like to know exactly what the Committee were going to divide upon if a Division was to be challenged. If they were to divide on the question of the entire exclusion of Lascars from the crews of the mail packets, then he could not support the reduction of the Vote. After the representations, however, that had been made to the Government in the course of the Debate that had taken place, he could not see any advantage in dividing the Committee on the Vote.

MR. JAMES LOWTHER understood that the hon. Member for Battersea discouraged the employment upon mail steamers of persons who were not born in the United Kingdom. For his own part, he only desired to discourage the employment of persons who were not VOL. XXXIX. [FOURTH SERIES.]

upon it has been continued, and I respectfully submit that the "Noes' did challenge a Division. [Cries of 'No, no!"]

*THE CHAIRMAN: But the Amendment which the hon. Member moved last night lapsed in the ordinary course. It was not repeated to-day, and I again say that when I called upon the "Noes' there was no voice against the Motion, and therefore I was compelled to say the " Ayes" had it.

MR. BURNS: On a point of order, Sir, I apprehend that we continued the discussion to-day on the Amendment. I think it was generally understood that a Division would be taken on the reduction of the Vote, and I submit that that Division should now be taken. [Loud cries of "No, no!" Well, then, if I am permitted, I will further move that the Vote be reduced by £50.

*THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member cannot move that, as the Vote has been passed. The discussion to-day has not been on any Amendment, but upon the whole Vote. The question now before the Committee is that a sum not exceeding £2,009,281 be granted to defray the 2 T