asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Dutch Government has granted to the Vulkan Company, which is a large German firm, the right to construct a private harbour near Rotterdam, close to the North Sea; and whether the Vulkan Company works in the closest conjunction with the German Government; whether this action on the part of the Dutch Government constitutes a departure from the principles which hitherto have governed the administration of all harbours, docks, and waterways in Holland, namely, that they should be under public control; and whether he has information which he can give on the subject?

I understand that the concession to the Vulkan Company to dredge and deepen the river beside the land at Vlaardingen already in their possession has been granted in principle, but I have no reason to suppose that this will in any way interfere with the control of the waterway by the Netherlands Government. I am informed that the company acquired the land for the purpose of transhipping ore from sea vessels into Rhine lighters, and I have no doubt that any other foreign company would have the right to obtain a similar concession.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any other company has obtained concessions for the Dutch, notably the Thyssen Company?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Will the First Lord of the Admiralty be consulted?

It is impossible to consult the First Lord of the Admiralty about a, concession to a private company.

asked whether the British Vice-Consulate at Haifa is to be raised to the level recently attained by the Consulates of other Powers at that place?

As at present advised I see no reason for altering the present status of the post.

Have not other Powers been differently advised? Have they not raised the status?

We have not got information that they have appointed a salaried Consul to this post. In any case I understand the fees received at this post were only £30 last year, which does not justify a salaried appointment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has considered the objects and conditions of the Imperial Ottoman Docks, Arsenals, and Naval Construction Company; and whether the British Ambassador in Constantinople has taken any part in furthering the formation of this company?

As I stated on the 5th of March, I am informed that the Turkish Government have granted a concession to a combination of the firms of Armstrong and Vickers for the organisation and reconstruction of the existing dockyards at Constantinople. This agreement was the result of private negotiations between the Turkish Government and the firms interested in which His Majesty's Government had no participation.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that Sir Charles L. Ottley, late secretary of the Imperial Defence Committee, is a director of the Imperial Ottoman Docks, Arsenals, and Naval Construction Company, and that this company has been formed for the building and repair of the warships of a foreign Power; and whether he will take steps to provide that any servant of the Crown holding a position of the character held recently by Sir Charles L. Ottley shall be debarred on relinquishing his post from entering, directly or indirectly, the service of a foreign Power?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the last part, I would refer my hon. Friend to the replies which I gave on this subject on 20th March, 1912, and 9th January, 1913.

Will the Prime Minister reconsider this matter in view of recent developments on the Continent of Europe?

These questions are always engaging my consideration.

Is he an ex-admiral of the Royal Navy drawing pension, and is not his position as a pensioner rather inconsistent?

I require notice of that.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister question No. 47.

That question has been answered by my hon. Friend, as arranged through the usual channels.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he can state what progress has been made with the construction of the pier at Ballinskelligs; and when it is expected that the work will be completed?

The greater part of the rock excavation for the pier has been done, and a good deal of the necessary filling-in to join the quay to the mainland has been accomplished. No definite date can be given for the completion of the work, as the rate of progress depends on the state of the weather, but it is not expected that the work will be completed before 31st March next.

asked the Chief Secretary on what ground an old age pension has not been granted to Johanna Fitzpatrick, Dungegan, Ballinskelligs, county Kerry, although the local committee which investigated her case were convinced that she had attained the statutory age; whether the local pension officer has been upheld in his contention that she has no right to the Christian name of Johanna because a family of the same name has been found in the Census Returns in which there happens to be the record of a girl whose Christian name was Julia; and whether he will have further inquiry made into the matter?

Johanna Fitzpatrick's last claim was disallowed in February, 1913, on the ground that there was no evidence that she was seventy years of age. It is not a fact that the pension officer contended that she had no right to the name of Johanna. In the record of her parents' family in the 1851 Census there is shown a child—Julia, aged six years, who, it would appear, is the claimant Johanna, the name Julia having been registered in error. If this is not the case, then the claimant has no evidence whatever of age. As the case has been decided, the Local Government Board have no power to re-open it.

What evidence can be forthcoming that this name of Johanna was registered in mistake for Julia?

Of course, I do not know. I will look into the matter afresh.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that it is a considerable time since the promise was made that a Grant would be given for the improvement of the Dingle pier and harbour, and that as a result of this delay the fishing industry of the district, which is the largest in Ireland, has suffered very considerably; and whether, in view of those facts, immediate steps will be taken to have this question, which is so essential to this district, dealt with at the earliest possible moment?

Negotiations with the various bodies concerned in the preparation of the plans and the provision of the funds for the proposed improvements in the pier and harbour accommodation at Dingle are being conducted with as much expedition as possible.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman twelve months ago give practically the same reply?

I can assure the hon. Member that the matter has been constantly before me and the Board and very great difficulties have arisen. It is one of those questions which cannot be settled offhand however desirable it, may be that we should do so.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware of the continuing loss sustained, through no fault of theirs, by payers of interest in lieu of rent for land for which many of them signed purchase agreements eight or nine years ago; whether he is aware that all their payments are in addition to the prices they agreed to pay and in excess of the annuities they agreed to pay, and that they are now neither becoming owners, nor secure in their position, nor diminishing the debt they have contracted to the State; whether they are being dealt with impartially in the order of date of signature; whether he will state the order of progress in the respective registers now kept; what the cause of the delay is; and whether he will expedite the completion of the sales?

In their purchase agreements the tenants contracted to pay interest in lieu of rent on the purchase money until the date of their holdings being vested in them, and this interest is less than the rent they would have to pay if they had not agreed to purchase. Estates pending for sale before the Estates Commissioners are dealt with in their Order on the Registers in accordance with the Regulations made under Section 23 (8) of the Irish Land Act, 1903, and Section 4 of the Act of 1909. The sales are being dealt with by the Commissioners as rapidly as possible.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that eight years is an unexpected and an entirely unreasonable period?

It is a long period, but it really does not arise from want of money. It arises from the difficulty in getting work through having regard to the enormous details which have to be carried out.

Is it not due to the killing of the Wyndham Act?

No, certainly not.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the Clements estate, Derry, county Mayo, has yet been acquired by the Congested Districts Board; and whether he is aware that the agent of this estate has declared to the tenants that the delay in purchase is due to the dilatory policy of the Board?

The estate referred to has not yet been purchased by the Congested Districts Board. An offer for purchase was issued in December, 1913, which was not accepted. Negotiations have since been proceeding, and the matter is at present under consideration. The Board have no information as to the statement alleged to have been made by the agent to the tenants.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether any of the gratuities awarded in the year 1913–14 out of the Irish Constabulary Force Fund, benefit branch, went to the families of officers; if so, will he state their number, rank, and amount; the number of deceased men to whose families gratuities were awarded, with the amount, and the principle on which the distinction was made, if any?

During the year 1913–14 the following gratuities were paid from the benefit branch of the fund: £606 to the representatives of a deceased Assistant Inspector-General, £613 in the case of a county inspector, and £647 to the representatives of two district inspectors. Sums amounting to £13,772 were also paid to the widows and children of 145 other deceased subscribers. No distinction was made in the mode of calculating the grants to the families of officers and men.

asked the Chief Secretary if he is aware of and will explain the charge of £193 18s. 3d. charged in the last year against the benefit branch of the Irish Constabulary Force Fund for compiling statistics?

The Inspector-General informs me that this payment was made to certain members of the staff of the constabulary office for overtime work in preparing extensive statistics of the benefit branch transactions, covering a period of thirty years, required by the National Debt Commissioners. The payment has been charged to the benefit fund with the approval of the Irish Government and the Treasury, and in accordance with a precedent of 1878, supported by legal opinion.

How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that payment out of the fund with the statement made in this House that the fund could be administered without expense to the subscribers?

Well, so far as there is a charge of this kind, it has to be paid in some way or other. This expense in connection with the working of the fund is a charge which properly falls on the fund.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the action of Sergeant O'Connor, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, Roscommon, in searching a consignment of bottles packed in canvas and straw on the premises of Mr. Beades, licensed vintner, Roscommon; whether he had any warrant to search the premises or to inspect these packages; whether he had any special instructions from the police authorities to act in this manner; if so, at whose instance the warrant was granted or the instructions given; and if instructions will be given in future to the policemen and other members of the constabulary force to discharge their duties in such a manner as will be within the law and inoffensive to the people?

I am informed by the police authorities that on the 21st instant Sergeant O'Connor saw five bales of goods lying on the street outside the door of the publican mentioned, and the sergeant, suspecting that the bales contained arms, asked the publican to open them so that he could search them. The publican refused, but told the sergeant that he could come into his yard and search a similar bale. This the sergeant did, and found nothing but empty bottles. No warrant was issued and the sergeant had not received any instructions, but acted on his own initiative.

asked the Chief Secretary whether any steps have been taken to reinstate Mr. Mansfield in his former position; whether the Commission of Inquiry which followed the charges for which he was dismissed did in effect substantiate almost every one of them; whether one of the principal officials of the Education Office stated at the inquiry that he could not find any rule of the Board which Mr. Mansfield had broken, and that he was therefore unable to explain or to justify his dismissal; and whether, under these circumstances, he proposes to take any action to compel the Board to do justice to this man, even though he has been the means of exposing the misconduct of the Board?

With regard to the first paragraph of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the question asked on this subject by the hon. Member for Mid-Antrim on the 19th February last. The Commissioners of National Education do not admit that the charges made by Mr. Mansfield were substantiated wholly or in part by the Committee of Inquiry. One of the officials of the Education Office stated in reply to a question put to him by a member of the Committee that he could not specify any special rule that was violated by Mr. Mansfield, but he did not say, as is alleged in the question, that he was therefore unable to explain or justify the dismissal of Mr. Mansfield. The Commissioners reserve to themselves the power to deal with teachers, as they may determine, who have conducted themselves improperly, and I have no power to interfere in the matter, although personally, and in the interests of primary education in Ireland, I should be glad if the dispute between the Board and Mr. Mansfield could be amicably arranged.

Is it a fact that the Committee of Inquiry which recently issued its Report was solely due to the charges brought by Mr. Mansfield against the National Board of Education in Ireland, and is it a fact that most of the charges were substantiated, and that the Committee condemned the Board?

No, Sir, I cannot go into that question, nor can I generally admit that the whole case regarding Mr. Mansfield was before the Committee. It is not a question whether he made direct charges or not. His conduct was condemned for other reasons. The inquiry has resulted in a very useful Report, and I am most anxious that the controversy should be brought to an end.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can see his way to convey to the National Board his personal desire that Mr. Mansfield should be reinstated?

It would be very easy to make the request that he should be reinstated, but unfortunately this is a matter affecting the discipline of the Board. I am using considerable pressure to bring about a result which it is desirable should be brought about in the interest of education.

May I ask whether the Committee of Inquiry reported that the Board permitted abuses to grow in volume until redress was impossible, and why, under these circumstances, blame should be attached to Mr. Mansfield for telling the truth?

The truth can be told in two different ways—I do not say by the same man. I am sorry that there should be this dispute between an efficient teacher and the Board, but I cannot myself control the Board.

made a remark which was inaudible in the Reporters' Gallery.

I wish to give the right hon. Gentleman notice that owing to the unsatisfactory reply I will raise this question on the Appropriation Bill.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that in the case of Thomas Madden, remanded to the Quarter Sessions on a charge of criminal assault on a child, and on which the Crown entered a nolle prosequi, three doctors, including a specialist, attended Court but were not asked a question, either publicly or privately; whether he is aware that there was only a difference of four months in the age of this child and of the child in another similar case where the prisoner was tried and convicted; and whether he will state why it was decided not to proceed with the case because the medical evidence would not justify that course when it was not known what the medical evidence was?

I am informed that two doctors made depositions in the Police Court as to the result of their examination of the child. The prison doctor also examined the prisoner and attended the Court and was interviewed by the Crown Counsel, and in consequence of what he stated it was decided not to proceed with the prosecution. According to the sworn evidence of the parents the age of the child alleged to have been assaulted by Madden was six years and eleven months, and the age of the other child eight and a half years. As I have already stated, in the case of the younger child there was no corroboration of her statement, whereas in the other case there was most conclusive proof of the guilt of the prisoner.

asked the Chief Secretary whether, as promised, he has communicated with the Macroom Rural District Council as to the desirability of taking immediate steps to build the 120 cottages for labourers which, though sanctioned several years ago by the Local Government Board, have not yet been commenced; will he state when the improvement scheme of which these cottages are part was finally promulgated; whether their non-erection is due to the fact that the sum allowed by the district council for the erection of each cottage is insufficient to induce contractors to tender, having regard to the present prices of building materials; whether some pressure will be applied to the district council to compel them to provide cottages for labourers whose present dwellings have been long ago condemned by the medical officer of health as unfit for habitation; is he aware that other district councils have with success employed direct labour for the erection of labourers' cottages where contractors could not be obtained; and is there any reason why the Macroom Rural District Council should not have recourse to this method to relieve the housing necessities of these 120 labourers?

The Local Government Board have again communicated with the district council. The loan for the improvement scheme in question was sanctioned in September, 1908, and it is probably correct that the sum allowed by the district council for the erection of the cottages is insufficient to induce contractors to tender. The Board have asked the district council to call a special meeting for the purpose of issuing fresh advertisements for tenders without making any limit of expenditure. The tenders received should enable the council to judge whether it would be more satisfactory and economical for them to enter into contracts even at somewhat increased prices, or to inaugurate a scheme of direct labour. Only in very few instances has direct labour been attended with success, and experience has shown that as a general rule it is more satisfactory to have the cottages erected by contract.

asked the Chief Secretary if he is aware that, on the 27th instant, at Edenderry (King's County) Sessions, three men were fined £60 each for poaching in the River Boyne and, in default of payment, sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour; if he can state the names of the justices who adjudicated; the exact offence or offences with which the defendants were charged; the names, ages, and conditions of life of the defendants; and whether defendants paid the fine or were committed to gaol?

I am informed that at Edenderry Petty Sessions, on the 25th instant, three men were fined £60 each for illegal fishing in the River Boyne, and in default twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour. The magistrates who adjudicated were Messrs. Tyrrell, Fay, Hamilton, Potterton, and Colonel Dunne. The exact offence with which the defendants were charged was unlawfully using a net for the taking of trout in the River Boyne without being duly licensed. Under Statute the minimum penalty for the offence is double the amount of the Licence Duty, which is £30. The defendants were Lawrence Bell, aged thirty-five; George Walker, aged thirty-two; and Thomas Hunt, aged thirty, all of no occupation. They have not paid the fines or been committed to prison, as a stay of fourteen days was placed upon the warrants.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any and, if so, what portion of the fees, rents, and royalties leviable under the Minerals Ordinance, 1913 (Nigeria), will be handed over to the native owners of the lands on which such fees, rents, and royalties are to be levied?

It is proposed to repeal the Ordinance in question and the draft of an Ordinance to replace it is under consideration. I am not in a position at present to say what the provisions of the law will be in respect to the matters referred to.

asked whether 107 prisoners were found to be detained in the prison in Northern Nigeria without any record being found of any conviction against them and that they had to be released; and, if so, how long these prisoners had been detained?

I have no information as to this alleged illegal detention of prisoners. If the hon. Member can give me any evidence of the occurrence of such cases, I will ask the Nigerian Government for a report upon them.

asked what section of the Provincial Courts Ordinance provides for the case of civil suits between the Government and the natives of Nigeria?

This is provided for by a separate Ordinance—Chapter 7 of the Laws of Southern Nigeria.

asked whether the Protectorate of Nigeria, with the exception of certain small areas not yet brought under British Government control, is in a state of unbroken peace and tranquility; and, if so, why the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court should not be extended to the whole Protectorate with the exception of the disturbed areas?

The satisfactory state of peace and tranquility does not demand the extension to the more backward territories of Nigeria of a system which has been shown to be manifestly unsuited to them, and to cause great delays and many abuses.

asked if the Nigerian Provincial Courts Ordinance is passed will there be any provision that a native accused of a crime involving a sentence of death or penal servitude will be entitled as of right of demand to be tried by a judge of the Supreme Court with a jury and assessors?

No such provision is contained in the Ordinance. The provisions for transfer of cases to the Supreme Court and those requiring the confirmation of the Governor in the case of the heavier penalties are considered sufficient.

asked if the Nigerian Provincial Courts Ordinance is passed will there be any provision that actions by or against a native wherein the Government is interested shall, on the request of the native or the Government, be tried by the Supreme Court, and not a Provincial Court presided over by an executive officer?

Suits by or against the Government will remain within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

asked whether, considering the Supreme Court of Southern Nigeria has had jurisdiction over the Colony and Protectorate of Southern Nigeria for fourteen years, there is any urgency in the proposed legal changes; and whether the matter will be allowed to stand over till the wishes of the suitors and inhabitants could be taken and a Committee publicly inquire into the matter of the proposed changes?

It is only of recent years that the administration has been extended to large districts in the interior, to which the machinery of the Supreme Court has been found unsuitable. As I have already explained, the jurisdiction of the Court remains as before in the Colony and the principal centres of trade. There is no reason to delay the proposed legislation, which is advocated by all those who have adequate knowledge and experience.

asked whether the Supreme Court of Northern Nigeria did not try any criminal and only one civil cause during the fourteen years of its existence; and, if not, how many civil and criminal cases have been tried during that period?

I am not in a position to give this information without reference to the Governor-General of Nigeria. I will ask him for a report.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the revenue from Court fees in Southern Nigeria for 1912 was £103,000 and the judicial expenditure only £15,000; and whether he will consider the possibility of appointing additional puisne judges to the Supreme Court of Southern Nigeria, if it were necessary to strengthen the judiciary to meet the requirements of the amalgamation?

The figures quoted do not appear to correspond with any at my disposal. But I am advised that no additional puisne judges are required.

asked why African-British subjects in the Protectorate of Nigeria are to be placed under a different jurisdiction from African-British subjects in the Colony of Nigeria, the former under the Provincial and the latter under the Supreme Court; and whether the inhabitants of the Protectorate of Southern Nigeria and the southern province of the Protectorate of Nigeria, who' have up till now had the right to be tried by a judge and jury or assessors, will be deprived of this right by the Provincial Courts Ordinance?

The machinery of the Supreme Court is ill adapted to the needs or the inhabitants in the interior, who are mostly in a somewhat primitive stage of development; but the Court will have jurisdiction in the Colony and also in all the important centres of trade in the Protectorate. Trial by jury has never been in force outside the Colony, and this will remain unchanged. Trials, with assessors, are provided for in the Protectorate under the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether, in view of the present procedure required to obtain permits to visit the National Gallery, the Tate Gallery, the Wallace Collection, and the portions of Windsor Castle formerly opened to the public, and having regard to the number of Scottish and other visitors at present in London, he will arrange that permits for all these places might be obtained under reasonable conditions either at the office of the Commissioner of Works or at any one central office?

The issue of permits in these cases is not a matter under the control of the First Commissioner, and he does not see his way to interfere with the arrangements made.