strength of the Army far beyond what they believed to be necessary or desirable considering the very large expenditure at present demanded for military purposes. The difficulty they now had to meet arose from the depletion of the portion of the Army stationed at home in order to feed and support the portion that was serving abroad. Ever since 1872 the salutary rule of keeping one battalion at home for every battalion abroad had been ignored, owing to the increased requirements of the empire, and the result was that at present they had seventysix battalions abroad and only sixty-five at home, showing a deficit of eleven battalions on the home establishment. The demand of the highest military authorities that steps should be taken to diminish that deficit was felt by the Government to be irresistible. One of their proposals with that object was to add two battalions to the seven existing battalions of Guards, making nine in all, and to employ three out of those nine from time to time outside the United Kingdom. They hoped to settle the details of the proposal with a minimum of disturbance of existing arrangements and without in any way impairing the efficiency of the brigade. The precise duration of the tour of foreign service required most careful consideration, and would have to be adjusted with due regard to the effect of the change on recruiting for the brigade of Guards. The change would be introduced gradually, and it was proposed to send one battalion of the Guards this year to Gibraltar and to relieve it next year. The idea of the Government was that three battalions of the Guards should be stationed at Gibraltar under the Guards brigadier; but before the scheme was entirely carried out there would be ample time to consider whether it required any modification. The effect of the proposed operation would be to take three battalions off the foreign and to add three to the home establishment, thus producing exactly the same result as if they created six new line battalions, but costing the country about 200,000l. less per annum than the charge for six new line battalions. They had now 141 battalions of infantry, which gave them seventy pairs of linked battalions and one odd battalion-namely, the Cameron Highlanders, the only singlebattalion regiment in the service. They proposed to add to it a second battalion, thereby increasing the Army by one line battalion. The outcome of those changes would be that, whereas they had now seventy-six battalions abroad and sixtyfive at home, they would have seventy-three abroad to sixtynine at home, still leaving a deficit of four battalions, which, however, as it might be attributed to temporary circumstances, it was not intended at present to deal with. For the purpose of strengthening the garrisons of fortresses and coaling stations held for the Navy, it was proposed to make a slight increase of infantry of the line, also to add another battalion to the Malta Militia and another battalion to the West Indian Regiment, while the garrison artillery would be increased by 3,600 men.

It was further intended to provide one more battery of field artillery, giving them forty-five batteries, or the full complement of three army corps. These proposals would not be carried out at once, but would be spread over a period of three years.

The innovation proposed by the Government to assimilate the three regiments of Guards to those of the line by sending them on garrison duty abroad aroused some criticism, but as a whole the proposals were well received, and the subject dropped after a short debate.

The chief interest of the moment was centred on the House of Commons, where the principles of the new Education Bill of the Government were being keenly debated. The fact that the financial resolutions upon which the bill was to be founded were moved by the First Lord of the Treasury, and not by the Vice-President of the Council, indicated at the outstart that the chief intention of the Government was to provide money, and not to frame a new education code. Parliament in fact had been called together at an early date in order that the pledge given to the Conservatives in the last session should be redeemed before the close of the financial year. This pledge was in reality that the clergy should be rewarded by substantial aid to their denominational schools for the support given to the party at the general election, just as the landlords and farmers. had in the previous session been advantaged by the Agricultural Rating Bill. As on that occasion certain members of the Opposition found themselves unwilling to look into the mouth of the Government gift-horse, because their supporters would reap the benefits of the bill-so on the present occasion the knowledge that the voluntary schools relieved to a very appreciable extent the weight of education rate in numerous districts obliged many Liberals to abstain from opposing a measure which had its economical advantages. But if such considerations limited the leaders of the Opposition in their criticism, Mr. Balfour was not less hampered by the feeling that he was acting almost directly in defiance of the very principles upon which the bill of the previous session had been founded. In granting State aid to voluntary schools without insisting upon corresponding State control, he was ignoring the recognised views of his Liberal Unionist colleagues-and, at the same time, was acting contrary to the wishes of a strong body of Conservatives who preferred that schools should be aided out of the local rates rather than out of the national exchequer.

Mr. Balfour's speech in moving the resolutions was a clear statement from the Government point of view of the position in which the question stood. It was an answer to the oftrepeated declaration of the Opposition speakers that if the Government had last year brought in a brief and simple bill dealing with voluntary schools it would have met with general acceptance on both sides of the House.

He therefore hoped that their measure for giving relief to voluntary schools out of imperial funds would be found so restricted in its scope that there would be no danger of its defeat merely through the multiplication of those subjects for debate which members opposite were so ingenious in discovering. The bill which would be based on these resolutions did not attempt to cover the whole field of educational reform. He maintained that the promise to aid the voluntary schools had received general support, and the bill of the Government confined itself to that point, the experience of last year having shown that it was undesirable to attempt all at once any wide and general scheme of educational reform, lest it should be defeated by loss of time or by the multiplication of the opportunities of debate. As to the provision for freeing voluntary schools from rates he showed that the present position of such schools in relation to the rating authorities was one of great inequality and uncertainty. If it was said that relieving from rates was equivalent to giving aid out of the rates, he pointed out that the relief given was exactly the same as that given to churches, charitable institutions, and Nonconformist chapels. But the total amount of relief would only be something over 10,000l. a year in London, and less in other districts. The grant proposed last year was 4s. per child, which would have absorbed 489,000l., but it was now increased to 5s., which would take up, with the increase in the number of children, 616,500l. The money would be allocated by the Education Department, which was responsible to Parliament, but under the guidance of associations of schools which would be formed to advise the department how best the money could be distributed to the schools within the area of each association. Each association would receive its definite proportion of the grant, but the money would be so distributed that the poorer schools would obtain more and the richer schools less than 5s. per head. The department would, however, have power to reject or modify any scheme which the association might put forward, the whole object in view being to promote the efficiency of the schools. Any school which unreasonably refused to join an association might be deprived of its share of the grant, provided always that no school should be requested to join an association the majority of schools belonging to which were of a different denomination to its own. The result would be that urban schools which were really necessitous would receive more than rural schools, and associations containing town schools would get the grant in larger proportion than associations containing few town schools and many country schools, as there were larger needs in the town schools, which suffered much from the Education Act, while the rural schools benefited largely, and urban education was more costly than rural education. Each association would receive an amount of money corresponding to the number of scholars in average attendance, but subject to the fact that if

they had many urban schools they would get more than the average, and if many rural schools they would get less-the difference being decided by the Education Department. Such rich schools as refused to join the associations would be deprived of the grant, and their money would be distributed among the associated schools, while the unassociated schools would be dealt with by the department, unaided by the advice of any association. There would be no interference with the management of the schools, except that they would be required to have their accounts audited to the satisfaction of the department. He was afraid it would be impossible to pass the bill before the close of the financial year, but the voluntary schools would not suffer in the end, even if they got more of the grant this year, for they would gain enormously in the future—over 100,000l. a year-by the increase of the grant. He warned possible oppo

nents of the bill that if the denominational schools were starved out of existence the most serious consequences would result, for the people only consented to acquiesce in the undenominational teaching of the board schools so long as the denominational system stood side by side with it. Whether the bill failed or not, the Government had done well to introduce it, and they certainly intended to pass it during the present session.

Mr. Acland (Rotherham, West Riding) opened the criticism on the part of the Opposition by expressing his surprise at the unusual and remarkable manner in which this subject had been brought forward. The country had been undoubtedly led to believe that board schools were to be excluded, because otherwise the bill could not become law before March 31, whereas the committee were now informed that the measure would probably not be passed before the close of the financial year. The Opposition were not disposed to object to an increased grant to voluntary schools under reasonable conditions, but they held that necessitous board schools were equally deserving of attention at the same time. The Government, he complained, were not observing the principle of equal treatment as between voluntary and board schools. They had framed their resolutions in such a way as to restrict the debate, and they were evidently determined to leave the board schools out in the cold. There was nothing in the bill to guarantee that the present private subscriptions to voluntary schools should be maintained at the existing level. Again, the bill contained no provision for improving the management of the voluntary schools through the representation of either the public or the parents of the children."

Mr. Jebb (Cambridge Univ.) and Sir Charles Dilke (Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire), holding diametrically opposed political opinions, concurred in asserting the claims of necessitous board schools, and Sir John Lubbock (London Univ.) confessed that the statement of the First Lord of the Treasury was a surprise to him in many respects. They ought not to do anything in

that House that would enable denominational schools to be carried on without the aid of private subscriptions, but it was undoubtedly a hardship that persons who contributed to a voluntary school should also be called upon to pay the School Board rate in the same district. He asked the Government to consider whether they could not to a great extent meet the exigencies of the voluntary schools by relaxing the rule as regards class subjects and by then allowing subscriptions to

come in instead of rates.

On the second night of the debate Sir W. Hart-Dyke (Dartford, Kent), a former Vice-President of the Council, thought the best thing they could do was to acknowledge frankly that the School Board system must obtain in this country and that it was not incompatible with the existence of voluntary schools. His own firm belief was that the only solution of the great educational difficulty was the substitution of an educational body in every county in place of a great central department. As for the present proposal, it was an honest endeavour to fulfil the pledge which had been given by her Majesty's Government. He was surprised that some members on the ministerial side appeared to be supporters rather of board schools than of voluntary schools. There was not a murmur of thanks to the Government for introducing this scheme because it helped the voluntary schools under whose auspices those hon. gentlemen won their seats in the House of Commons. In his opinion it was absolutely necessary that the bill should direct the Educational Department in distributing the grant to voluntary schools to have due regard to the amount of the private subscriptions. He would have preferred a more comprehensive scheme, but he intended to support this proposal with his vote to the very end because he believed that in the difficult circumstances of the case it was the best proposal which her Majesty's Government could have produced. With regard to his hon. friends who had been criticising the Government proposal adversely, he might remind them that they were playing with edged tools and that big majorities did not last for ever.

Sir H. Fowler (Wolverhampton) addressed himself to the question rather as ex-minister than as the spokesman of the dissenting body to which he belonged-the Wesleyans-who, it was believed, were generally favourable to the Government proposals. He was scandalised at the suggestion that the initiatory stage under discussion was purely formal. The Government had advisedly chosen a mode of procedure which necessitated the discussion at this stage of the most vital parts of the bill. Consequently the Government had no right to object to or to shorten this discussion. A financial resolution was usually made as wide as possible in the first instance and was afterwards limited by the bill which was based upon it. He contended that the inclusion of the board schools would have saved time, because measures of equal justice passed far more