On behalf of the hon. Member for Tower Hamlets, Stepney (Mr. Wootton Isaacson), I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs—(1) whether Her Majesty's Government is aware that the Delagoa Bay Arbitration Tribunal has again postponed pronouncing sentence for ten weeks; (2) whether they are aware it is reported that the Government of the South African Republic is negotiating with that of Portugal for the purchase of the line; and (3) whether they will take steps to ensure that no properties affected by the arbitration shall be disposed of either publicly or privately before the tribunal has pronounced its sentence, so that all the properties sequestrated may remain at the entire disposal of the bondholders in case the sentence should be given in their favour?

By a decision dated the 3rd of June the Court of Arbitration has fixed a period of one month for the filing by each party of a summary, as short as possible, of the points of law and fact on which they base their conclusions; and a period of six weeks for delivery of schedules of the documents comprised in the written cases, the authenticity of which is challenged by either side, and for the enumeration of the points on which it is desired to take oral evidence or the opinion of experts. Both periods are to commence from the 15th of June, the day on which the decision was communicated officially to the British, United States, and Portuguese Legations at Berne. With regard to the last two paragraphs of the question, Her Majesty's Government have no knowledge that such negotiations are in progress. They would be inconsistent with assurances which we have received from Portugal that, until the Award is given, no steps whatever will be taken which will affect the future of the railway.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, if, in the Finance Accounts, Revenue, the accounts arising from the Income Tax, under Schedule D, embracing professions and trades, could be divided into three sections, showing the amounts—firstly, from manufactures and industrial occupations; secondly, from professions; and thirdly, from distribution, with the object of showing if our industries are progressing or otherwise?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for his suggestion, and I will take care that it shall be considered. Of course, in these matters, one has to place the expense and trouble of additional returns against the advantage that may arise from them, and to take care to avoid, also, anything interfering with secrecy.

asked whether one schedule did not descend to the lower figure of £253,000, whereas in the other there was over £8,000,000.

I will look into the matter.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would also consider the advantage of setting out the amounts derived from realty and personalty respectively.

I think that will hardly apply to the question of my hon. Friend below the Gangway.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, if the War Office will recommend that a gratuity of £60 be paid by Her Majesty's Government to Mr. Henn towards his expenses arising from the accident which occurred on the 9th June 1894, to his son, who was standing at his house door, by a stray bullet from the rifle range near Tipton, which caused his death; and whether he is aware that Mr. Henn's house is almost in a direct line behind the rifle range, and that, since the accident on 9th June, 1894, many bullet marks have been found on Mr. Henn's house.

Volunteer battalions are held primarily responsible for claims arising out of accidents such as that referred to, and in cases where there has been no negligence on the part of, and no blame attaches to the corps, it is reimbursed any legitimate expenditure it may necessarily incur. If the corps has not already discharged the claim which was made on it last year by Mr. Henn it will be instructed to do so. The house is not quite in a direct line of fire. The range was closed after the accident and consequently the house has not since been examined for bullet marks.

inquired whether that would give to Mr. Henn power to claim some compensation for loss.

Yes, Sir. The expenses will be paid by the Volunteer corps, and, if there has been no negligence, they will be reimbursed by the War Office.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the allowance made in a lump sum to the Head of a Department to enable him to obtain copying or clerical assistance in accordance with the provisions of the Treasury Minute of 10th August 1889 (paragraphs 24, 25, and 26), is intended to be applied in the employment of persons at a higher rate of pay than that formerly paid to the old class of temporary copyists, or on work of a more important character than that formerly performed by that class; whether the allowance of £1,300 (Bankruptcy), and £1,200 (Companies (Winding-up), entered in the Civil Service Estimates (page 119) as required by the Inspector General in Bankruptcy for clerical assistance for the year 1895–96, will be applied in the employment of persons receiving a higher rate of pay than 35s. a week; whether one personal clerk employed temporarily under these regulations in the office of the Inspector General in Bankruptcy is paid a salary of £400 a year out of this allowance, and another personal clerk is also employed in the same office at a salary of £150 a year, payable out of the same allowance; whether any other personal clerks, employed under these regulations and paid out of an allowance for clerical assistance of the character referred to in the aforesaid Treasury Minute, are employed in any other Government Department at a higher rate of pay or salary than 35s. weekly; and, if so, whether the right hon. Gentleman would have any objection to have a Return of such employments, with the rate of pay or salary assigned to each post, placed upon the Table of the House; whether these appointments are in the patronage of the head of the Department; and whether the personal clerks so appointed undergo any examination at the hands of the Civil Service Commissioners?

The paragraphs of the Treasury Minute referred to apply only to copyists. The higher appointments referred to are made by arrangement between the Treasury and the Departments concerned, under the authority of the Order in Council, dated June 4th, 1870. Such lump sum allowances as are referred to are not necessarily confined to purely copying and routine work. The two sums allowed to the Inspector General in Bankruptcy are not confined to such services. The distribution of such an allowance, when the total allowance of the amount has been fixed, has been left to the discretion of the head of the Department, and the Treasury have not hitherto interfered with it; and, therefore, I have no official information as to the details. I am unable on such short notice to say whether the suggested Return could be given, without communicating with the Board of Trade and other Departments concerned; but I will gladly make further inquiry. Persons so employed are selected by the head of the Department, and without any examination by the Civil Service Commissioners.

said that, as far as he was able to form an opinion, he saw no objection to the proposed Amendment; but he might mention that he had been informed by a high legal authority in the House of Lords that their Lordships might take a different view of the situation. If so, the Bill would be lost, and if the hon. Member insisted on moving his Amendment, the hon. Member must take the risk of that.

said, there was certainly a difference of opinion as to this provision, which, though undoubtedly a novel one, safeguarded as it was here, could not, he thought, do much harm. As, however, his hon. Friend had been told that the Bill might be lost altogether if he persisted in pressing his Amendment, his hon. Friend might find that, in his attempt to make the measure more perfect, he might lose it altogether, and he ought to weigh well the responsibility he was incurring.

said, that he gave full weight to that consideration, but it was balanced by the future consideration that the Bill could be of no use without the Amendment in the particular case that it was designed to meet. He was aware of the peculiar nature of the proposal he was putting forward. He would ask the First Lord of the Treasury, if the Amendment were now inserted and if the Bill should be thrown out by the House of Lords, whether the Government would give a pledge that on the reassembling of the new Parliament they would take the whole case into their consideration and see what could be done; because he thought that, circumstanced as they were at this moment, it was desirable to make provision for cases of this nature.

said, that he did not know on which side of the House he might be sitting in the next Parliament. But whoever might be sitting on the Treasury Bench when the next Parliament reassembled would probably feel very little energy or desire to get through more than the necessary financial business. The hon. Member seemed to look at this Bill as a measure for the relief of one particular individual, but it was not from that point of view that it should, he thought, be regarded. He looked upon the Bill as effecting a desirable Amendment in the present law, which required that these accused persons should only be tried at Bow-street, although they might live at the other end of the kingdom.

said, he thought the point was not an unreasonable one, and that it was one which was sure to receive the attention of the right hon. Gentleman.

said, the Bill itself was a reasonable one, for it simply proposed that the case should be heard in a county town as well as in London. That was no new principle, but there was the point of hearing a criminal charge in the absence of the criminal. At that late period of the Session he did not think that this Amendment ought to be allowed.

said, it appeared there was some feeling in the matter, and therefore he could not accept the Amendment.

said, as the Bill was one to which no objection was taken, he hoped the House would allow it to pass through its remaining stages.