asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he can give the House any information as to the condition and progress of the works for repairing a breach in the sea pavement of the pier of Dunmore Harbour, County Waterford, for which a sum of public money was granted about seven years ago; and, whether, if such does not appear to be satisfactory, he will take steps to have the necessary repairs carried out to ensure the preservation of a structure which was of incalculable value not only to the inhabitants of the district, but to a large number of fishermen who resort there in the season?

The repair of piers in no way concerns the Irish Government—it belongs to the Board of Works, which is a Department under the control of the Treasury the Question, therefore, should be addressed to and answered by the Secretary to the Treasury In the Session of 1868–9 a sum of £964 was voted for the repair of considerable damage which had been done to the works of Dunmore Harbour by the unusually severe storms of the preceding winters. That sum was found insufficient for the complete repair of the injury done to the sea pavement, and further sums have since been voted to make good the damage done by storms during the progress of the works of repair. The works of the harbour are now in a satisfactory state, and the cost of making good the slight damage which the storms of the past winter have done has been provided for in the Estimates for the coming year, and the remaining repairs will be completed this summer. In 1872, a sum of £1,500 was voted for dredging out the harbour, which had silted up so as to leave a depth of only 5 feet to 7 feet of water at low water spring tides. This work has been carefully carried out and will be complete in two or three months, and there is now a depth of from 14 feet to 15 feet in the greater part of the harbour, and so far, therefore, the work is perfectly satisfactory.

asked. Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If it is his intention to remit the tax on farmers' carts and shepherds' dogs in Scotland?

, in reply, said, the subject was one to which his attention had been directed, but he hoped the noble Lord would forgive him if he declined to anticipate the Financial Statement by giving a more explicit answer to his Question.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, If it is true that the Catholic inmates of the Royal Military Hospital at Kilmainham, Dublin, are obliged to leave the Hospital in all weathers and at all seasons to attend Divine Service though many of them are advanced in life and infirm, while their Protestant comrades, though little more than one-fifth of the whole number of pensioners have a chapel and resident chaplain of their own religion in the Hospital?

, in reply, said, the Question related to an institution which was under the control of the War Department and not of the Irish Government. If the Question were repeated after Easter, he had no doubt his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War would be prepared to answer it.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he will lay upon the Table of the House, a Copy of the Correspondence between the Governor of Singapore and others, with the Colonial Office, relative to the Singapore Emigration Act; and, whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to repeal or amend that Act?

in reply, said, the whole question with respect to emigration to the Straits Settlements had for some time been occupying the attention of the Colonial Office. As to the ordinance relative to the emigration of Chinese labourers, some amendment of it was evidently required. The Correspondence on the subject was not yet complete, and until it assumed a complete shape, he could not say whether it could be produced, nor what were the intentions of Her Majesty's Government in the matter.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether, looking to the serious disasters which have happened to some of Her Majesty's ships from default of Navy ground-tackle, and to the manifest importance of providing the best and most trustworthy anchor for use in the Royal Navy, he will state what practical objection exists, if any, to carrying out the proposal indicated in Mr. Trotman's letter of 13th January 1873, seeing that a trial of three other competing anchors, viz. the "Admiralty," "Rodgers'," and the "Improved Martin's" anchors, is shortly to take place on board Her Majesty's ship "Devastation," now at Spithead?

The trial by the Devastation is at present to be confined to Martin's anchor, for the reason that the construction of that anchor gives greater facilities for firing from turrets and for ramming than any other anchor. Should there be a trial of any other anchor than Martin's by the Devastation Trotman's shall be included.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Government is in possession of any information respecting the number and position of British subjects in Bilbao; whether Her Majesty's Consul is shut in; and, whether any steps have been taken to communicate with him, and to insure duo respect to the British Flag from the Commanders of both the combatants?

The only information which is to be found at the Foreign Office with regard to the British population at Bilbao is contained in Consular Reports, which I have had an opportunity of looking at since the previous night. From them I learn that the British population at Bilbao in ordinary times is supposed to be between two and three hundred. We know, however, that since the war broke out, a great number of British subjects have left that place; consequently, the number there at present is not known. Her Majesty's Consul at Bilbao has lately informed Mr. Bayard, our Minister at Madrid, that on the 10th February he had taken all the precautions he possibly could to provide for the protection of British subjects at Bilbao; that he informed both the General commanding the Carlists and the General commanding the Republicans that he had provided a house near his own, with a largo enclosure, where British subjects might take refuge, in case the city was besieged; and that both those Generals assured him that those places being under the British flag would be respected. The last accounts which the Government have received from Bilbao arrived two or three days ago. They are to the effect that the Consul is still at Bilbao, and that Her Majesty's ship Ariel has arrived off the coast, and has endeavoured to communicate with the Consul, but without effect. The conduct of the Consul has been approved by Her Majesty's Government; but they have learnt from Madrid, that the expression of that approval has not reached him, nor does it appear likely to do so under present circumstances.

said, he hoped to be able to bring on the Licensing Bill soon after Easter, in order that it might be discussed before Whitsuntide.

The hon. and learned Member moved for this Return last Session. My noble predecessor (The Marquess of Hartington) opposed the Motion, and it was negatived without a division. Whatever reason existed then for refusing this Return, exists now with double force. My noble Friend came down to the House last night, at considerable inconvenience to himself, to oppose this Motion, which was then on the Paper, but the hon. and learned Member was not then in his place to propose it. He now proposes it in the absence of my noble Friend. The hon. and learned Member asks for a Return of all sums paid out of public moneys on account of damages or costs recovered in any action againt officers of the Royal Irish Constabulary. It would be injurious to the public service and to the peace of the country to grant such a Return. The matter to which the Motion refers happened so long as three years ago. It created no little ill feeling and excitement in the north of Ireland. That feeling is now quieting down, and I think it would be not only inconvenient, but wrong, to do anything which would excite it again. Moreover, this matter is not only entirely over, but, if anything wrong was done in it it was done by a Government which no longer exists. The hon. and learned Member placed before the House last Session the circumstances which he has detailed to-night, and the House then, without a division, negatived the Return. The hon. and learned Member seeks to ascertain out of what fund these sums were paid. I have not myself investigated the Estimates to sec out of what fund they have been paid. If the hon. and learned Member's contention is right, they were paid out of moneys into the application of which the House intends there should be no inquiry. It would therefore be contrary to the intention of the House to give this Return, and materials could not be found from which it could be given. I may say, with reference to this whole question, that it is absolutely necessary, in my opinion, that the subordinates or other officials of the Government should be protected and countenanced by the Government in the execution of their duties. The practice of the English Government is, I believe, not quite identical, but very similar, to that of the Irish Government. The practice of the Irish Government, at any rate, is this:—When an action is brought against a resident magistrate, or a member of the Constabulary Force, the person accused has to defend himself at his own risk and cost. At the conclusion, he is at liberty to apply to the Government for compensation for any damages which may have been awarded against him. The Government then take the whole matter into their consideration, with the advice of their Law Officers, and, if it appears to them that the officer has acted bonâ fide in the execution of his duty, they would compensate him for the loss incurred by him. I maintain that this is not only right, but that it is absolutely essential to the public service that officers should feel that they will be protected by the Government in the proper execution of their duties. I have no hesitation in stating my opinion that, by sanctioning the repayment to any officer of the damages awarded against him, the Government makes itself responsible for his conduct, and that that responsibility should be borne by the Government before Parliament. It is my intention that, as a rule, such re-payments should appear in the Estimates of the year in future. As this Motion relates to a subject which is over, which happened under a Government which no longer exists, I trust the hon. and learned Member will not put the House to the trouble of a division.

said, he would not trouble the House to divide, solely because he believed it would be useless. He still thought this was a matter in which the right hon. Baronet should not refuse a Return. On the Motion which he made last year he asked for the items and the Estimates in which the sums would appear. The reply of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) was that they did not appear in the Estimates, and therefore the Motion was useless. It was consequently negatived; but he (Mr. Butt) gave Notice that he would renew it this Session he thought the right hon. Baronet was mistaken in supposing that there was any such practice in England as he had described. He remembered that in the case of Governor Eyre a division was taken. To teach, officers that the Government would keep them harmless in case of actions for damages against them was unconstitutional. To do so was to teach officers to look to the Government, and not to the law, for the guidance of their conduct. It might be said that such expenses were paid out of secret service money; but he believed they were inserted surreptitiously in the law costs of the Crown Solicitor by the directions of some Government official. [Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH: That is not so.] He was not satisfied with the reply, and should again bring the matter under the attention of the House.

regretted that no Notice whatever had been given to him of the hon. and gallant Member's intention to move for this important Return, and he trusted the hon. and gallant Gentleman would not press his Motion under these circumstances. He should be happy to institute inquiries into the subject; and, if there were no objection to the Return, it should be produced.

said, it appeared to him that the House was indebted to his hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. M'Laren) for converting what would be a fallacious Return into a complete one which would enable hon. Members to understand the matter. He thought the proper course would be to adjourn the debate, so that the noble Lord (Viscount Sandon) might in the meantime make inquiries.