understood the right hon. Gentleman to have suggested that they ought to have stopped the operations. MR. RITCHIE : No. been going on for more than two years. was MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER said they were agreed that the Government a favourable result." Did anybody had been justified in carrying out in this House suppose that if the Governthe expeditions. He supposed there ment had had any idea what the course was no section in that House to of the war was going to be they would whom the necessity of continuing have entered upon it? And, indeed, this campaign was more unpalatable there need never have been any war at than to the Government. It was obvious all but for the mismanagement of the to everybody concerned, as the right hon. people on the spot. What made the Gentleman had said, that there was no present case so inexcusable was that we glory or profit in the campaign. As to had had so many examples in the past of what was the policy of the Government similar wars. We had had protectorate with regard to Somaliland, he thought wars on the north-west frontier of India. it was a matter of plain common sense. Wars like the present one had occurred The policy of the Government was, and over and over again, in which enormous must be, that of anybody else in their sums of money had been spent. How position; they were now carrying on long was this war to go on? Would this campaign with some anticipation of Estimate after Estimate be presented to a favourable result; they hoped to the House as long as the Mullah was able produce such an impression by the to keep the field and threaten fresh raids? disorganisation of the forces of the It must come to an end; and was it not Mullah as to make it sure that we should the part of good sense to endeavour to not be exposed a fourth time to a re- bring it to an end as soon as they currence of these attacks. He could not possibly could? Was it not a reasonable for the life of him understand what was policy for the Government to make up the other point in the operations at their mind and let their officials and their which hon. Members recommended they generals know that they would not should stop. His right hon. friend did continue this wild chase of the Mullah not suggest that they should have from oasis to oasis, and that if they did stopped when we were defeated; he did not succeed in catching him in the present not suggest that they should stop now trap, these costly expeditions would when we had a chance of success. The be abandoned and subsidiary methods, point, of course, at which they should which have been found so useful on the stop would be when we had achieved north-west frontier of India, would be success, and secured the safety of those adopted to repel the raids of this nimble for whom we were responsible. [Cries and active enemy? He believed that the of "Who are they?"] They were practi- debate would not be futile if it could cally the whole of the coast tribes along make the Government realise that these the northern edge of Somaliland. It expeditions were useless. It was not from would be futile on his part to state an any Party spirit that they desired the exact time when the operations ought Government to change their policy, and to stop, or when they hoped to achieve put an end once for all to these sources success. He did not agree with the hon. of expenditure. Member for Battersea that his reference to Holy Writ was at all relevant in this matter. He thought it would be a bad day for the British Empire when one took the hon. Member's advice. MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.) said he did not think the Government could be surprised at this debate. This war had MR. BAYLEY (Derbyshire, Chesterfield) said he wished to ask whether the Mullah or his friends had made any suggestion, direct or indirect, to our officers in the field of negotiating in any way to bring this war to an end. Was there any chance of our securing the services of any man out in Somaliland who had influence with the Mullah to induce him to come to reasonable terms of peace? MR. WILLIAM REDMOND (Clare, E.) said that on previous occasions he had entered his protest against the whole of the expenditure entailed by this expedition. At the outset he desired to say that when they were dealing with a matter of this kind, which involved the expenditure of millions of the taxpayers' money, they ought not to be treated to any exhibition either of heat or temper from the new Secretary for War. The Irish Members were accustomed to have their protests derided and their actions misrepresented; but he thought it was a new departure for the Secretary of War to rise and with some passion to find fault, not with an Irish Member at all, but with the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer because he ventured to express views not on all-fours with those he entertained. They were at least entitled to have courtesy and not temper displayed in discussions of this kind; and he warned the Minister for War that they were only at the commencement of the session, that the right hon. Gentleman had a great deal of work to get through in connection with his Army Estimates, and that, if they were to have displays of temper, he promised the right hon. Gentleman most faithfully that the discussions of Army affairs would be protracted. He was himself naturally by temperament most peaceably disposed, and it was not very easy to irritate him; but one of the things which did irritate him was, when discussing a question like this, if they were not treated with that calmness of demeanour which certainly ought to characterise a highly placed and not badly paid official. He complained that there seemed to be no settled plan of campaign in reference to this expedition; and he emphasised the fact that whereas when the House was asked in 1901 for a Vote of £200,000, and it was said that that amount might possibly be the last demanded, now they made a demand which ran into millions, and were apparently just as far off seeing the end of this expedition as ever. From the Irish point of view expenditure of this kind was simply and absolutely intolerable. He defied any member of the Government to say how, in any way, England could possibly gain either in prestige, commerce, or reputation, from an expedition of this kind; but, whatever England had to gain, they knew perfectly well that, as far as Ireland was concerned, they had absolutely nothing to gain, though he supposed they would have to pay, in the usual course, their share of the expenditure. England might have a vendetta against the Mullah and might have made up its mind, for the welfare and stability of the Empire, that he should be hunted down; but Ireland had no quarrel of the kind or any serious interest in the matter; and he put it, as man to man, if he were not justified, representing thousands of farmers and poor agricultural labourers in Ireland, in protesting in their names against the expenditure of millions of money in a wild-goose chase in Africa which could bring no credit or honour to England and certainly no good to Ireland. Sometimes the Irish Members were derided because they were not more content and more temperate in their language and more patient. he was surprised that, in face of the provocation they received in matters of this kind, they maintained the patience they had exhibited from time to time. It was an unfair, an unjust, and a monstrous thing that Ireland should be directly or indirectly charged a single shilling for this expedition. He freely admitted that, as far as he knew the merits of the quarrel, his sympathies were with this unfortunate African native who was being hunted down; but if the Government would undertake that a reduction 'should be made in respect of Ireland and that it should not be called upon to bear any part of the cost of this war, he would, in spite of his sympathies, let them have the Vote of money without protest. So long, however, as Ireland was charged with any proportion of the cost, they were entitled to make their protest. But Almost nightly since the session began they had had proof upon proof piled up of the unfair way Ireland was financially treated. They asked for money for educational purposes to improve the industrial life of the country; they had asked he had done so over and over again, almost humiliating himself-for money another disaster occurred, and more men and money were asked for. But even now the Government were unable to say whether there was any prospect of an end being put to those operations. That was not the proper way to conduct such a business. The Government should in the first instance have issued a Blue-book setting forth all the circumstances and stating what they intended to do, and they could then have asked Parliament to sanction the expedition. Instead of that the expedition was entered upon without hon. Members being given an opportunity to vote Aye or No. All they were asked to do was, when blundering and incapacity was shown and when there was disaster and loss of life, to vote millions of money. in order to improve their coast line and especially their miserable harbours; but they found it almost impossible to get any liberal response to their demands, and yet they were asked to come down without demur and vote hundreds of thousands of pounds for the purpose of hunting the Mullah in Somaliland. All he could say was that he would give himself the consolation-a poor one though it was of protesting as strongly as he could; and the Government certainly should not get the Vote until he told them all he thought about it. They wondered often why the Irish people were not as loyal as other peoples in the Empire to the English connection, and why the Army and Navy were not popular in Ireland. The reason would be found in Votes such as that they were now considering. How could they expect people who did not get the use of a gunboat to protect their fisheries, to exhibit enthusiasm for an expedition such as this. The expedition was making England the laughing-stock of the world. If they wanted to break the power of the Mullah permanently and effectively why did not the Government make their arrangements accordingly? Why did they continue to dribble out small bodies of troops which were cut to pieces by the overwhelming numbers arrayed against them? It was one of the most disgraceful, most lamentable, and most discreditable chapters in the recent history of this country, that brave soldiers and devoted men should be sent on expeditions for which they were not in the slightest degree equipped. Quite recently a number of gallant officers were simply overwhelmed by superior numbers, and their lives were sacrificed to the blundering and bungling of the War Office. That was not the way to conduct an expedition of this kind. If the Government made up their minds to crush the Mullah they should have come to Parliament and said, "This is going to be an expenditure of millions of money, it will take a considerable time, we will have to send a large force; will you allow us to do it." Instead of doing that the Government were simply trifling with the question, and when a disaster occurred they simply said they had not calculated the strength of the Mullah and they wanted a little more money and a few more men. Then 1 1 At the beginning of the campaign the then Secretary of State for War said that the Mullah was mad, and that he would be very soon overcome and made to realise the enormity of his offence in endeavouring to defend his own country. Then followed news of about six or seven British officers being slaughtered, and then it was discovered that the Mullah was not quite so mad as had been imagined, and more money was asked for. Now the Committee was asked to believe that this war had been entered on in order to keep faith with certain tribes. Was there ever a more monstrous proposition than that British and Irish taxpayers should be asked to spend millions of money in order that war might be waged against a native chief who had incurred the enmity of other native chiefs. He was rather amused when he heard the Secretary of State say that after all there was some slight prosThat was not a very sanguine [view nor pect of those operations being successful. one which would encourage the House of Commons to sanction the continuance of this expedition. He supposed that the right hon. Gentlemen based his assumption on the statement he made that the Mullah had become somewhat depressed. He himself did not know whether the Mullah was depressed or not at the present time; neither did he care; but if it was possible for the Mullah to know that the right hon. Gentleman was in charge of the military arrangements of this country, so far from depressing him Treasury Bench and sit below the Gangway, but that he should be expected never to say a word in opposition to the darlings of the gods, who were now on the Treasury Bench. As far as he was concerned he was in this enviable position, that he had never been in a Cabinet. SIR GEORGE BARTLEY (Islington, N.) rose in his place, and claimed to move, That the Question be now put. the knowledge would encourage him, because the general consensus of opinion was that bad as the late Secretary of State had been, the present Gentleman from Belfast was in all probability a great deal worse. The first thing necessary for the country, if it wished to be successful in military expeditions, was to put its military affairs into the hands. of competent and able men who knew their business, men who would be able to give an adequate statement to the House, and men who, above all, would be able to keep their tempers. He protested, as a private Member, against the exhibition of temper on the part of the Secretary of State when the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer had the audacity not to agree with him. They were coming to a pretty pass when it was not sufficient that a prominent member of the Government should leave the Noes, 137. Agg-Gardner, James Tynte Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds Blundell, Colonel Henry MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to give notice that I will make the Government pay for this over and over again. Question put, "That the Question be now put. AYES. The Committee divided:-Ayes, 204; (Division List No. 20.) Cripps, Charles Alfred Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tower Hamlets Gore, Hn. S.F. Ormsby-(Linc.) Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo. Horner, Frederick William Houston, Robert Paterson Manners, Lord Cecil Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriessh.) Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir FrederickG. Platt-Higgins, Frederick Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne Reid, James (Greenock) Remnant, James Farquharson Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich) Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley Talbot, Rt. Hn.J.G(Oxf'd Univ. Valentia, Viscount TELLERS FOR THE AYES-Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes. Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) Boland, John Brigg, John Broadhurst, Henry Buxton, Sydney Charles Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) Dalziel, James Henry Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark) Ellis, John Edward (Notts.) | NOES. Flynn, James Christopher Furness, Sir Christopher Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb.John Harmsworth, R. Leicester Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. Mansfield, Horace Rendall Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen) Murphy, John 1 Newnes, Sir George Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham) Reckitt Harold James Redmond, John E (Waterford) Rose, Charles Day Spencer, Rt. Hn.C.R(Northants |