asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he will consider the expediency of making the appointment of a public executioner, or public executioners, dependent on the Home Office and not on the discretion of High Sheriffs, so as to render less likely the repetition of such a painful scene as occurred lately at Leeds when the rope broke and the culprit was twice hanged?

I need hardly, I am quite sure, say how deeply shocked I was to hear of what occurred at the late execution at Leeds. I immediately communicated with the local authorities, and requested that a full report should be made to me as to the circumstances of the case, but that report I have not yet received. There is no doubt, however, I shall have it in a short time. With respect to the Question of my hon. and learned Friend, the House is aware that the duty of seeing that an execution is duly carried out is cast upon the High Sheriff of the county, and that he is responsible for its being properly and as humanely done as possible. I do not think it would be wise to take away part of that responsibility from the High Sheriff, who is presumably at the place, and to put it upon the shoulders of the Home Secretary, who cannot possibly be there. At the same time, I am quite of opinion that every possible precaution should be adopted to secure that no untoward event should on any such occasion happen; and therefore I am quite prepared to take steps to provide that such assistance shall be given to the High Sheriff on all future occasions as to material and otherwise as I hope will effectually prevent the recurrence of such a lamentable circumstance as that referred to. I may, perhaps, be allowed to say, in reply to the Question which the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Mr. Serjeant Simon) has placed on the Paper, that as far as the information I have been able to obtain is concerned, I believe that death by execution, as carried out under the present form, is as speedy and as painless as under any that could be devised. I am not therefore at the present moment prepared to suggest to the House of Commons any alteration of the existing system.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to a report which appeared in the "Western Mail" of the 17th instant, which purports to be an account of the investigation which took place before the coroner's jury on its last day's sitting in respect to the explosion which took place in the Weigfach Pit, by which eighteen lives were lost, near Swansea, a few days ago, and if, more particularly, the evidence of Mr. Wales, the Inspector of Mines for the district, and the portion which runs as follows:—

"It is lamentable to think that persons placed in such responsible positions can be guilty of such conduct as not reporting the true state of the colliery, upon which so many lives depended;"

I have had information from the inspector of the district, and in consequence have directed proceedings to be taken against the foreman and manager of the mine?

asked the Secretary of State for War, If it is his intention to introduce the Army promotion and retirement scheme by Royal Warrant or not; and if it is true that Majors and Captains who obtained their present rank before the abolition of purchase will not be liable to compulsory retirement under its provisions?

I hope the hon. Member will not think me guilty of discourtesy if I reply that my intention is to introduce the measure as a whole, and not to answer Questions as to parts of it.

in rising to call attention to the organization of the Commercial Department of the Foreign Office, said, he believed that the heads of that Office were fully impressed with the importance of the duties of the department which related to commerce, and he could testify that it was impossible to have any transactions with the gentlemen who were connected with that department without feeling grateful for the readiness and courtesy with which those who had business with them were invariably met; but it was precisely because there was that impression of the importance of the duties which required to be discharged, and that readiness to meet what were believed to be the requirements of the public service, that he regretted to find there was no intention apparently of giving additional strength to the department in question. It seemed to be supposed in official quarters that nothing was required beyond what at present existed; but that was not the impression of the Mercantile Bodies of the country. Year after year at the annual meetings of the Associated Chambers of Commerce motions had been brought forward, the object of which was to improve that portion of our public service to which he referred; and although he did not agree with the proposal which had been received with the greatest amount of favour by those Bodies—namely, the appointment of a Minister of Commerce, he entirely shared in the feeling that a want existed which ought to be supplied. So far back as 1864 a Select Committee of the House, known as Mr. Forster's Committee, had been appointed on the subject; at that time the relations of this country with foreign States were in the hands jointly of the Board of Trade and the Foreign Office. Questions appeared to have been handed backwards and forwards between those Departments in a manner which occasioned great loss of time, which was in various ways prejudicial to the commercial interests of the country, and which culminated in 1864 in the neglect of a question which arose upon the commercial relations of England and Belgium. A number of changes had been made since then. One was effected in 1866, when the Commercial and Consular departments of the Foreign Office were amalgamated; but the Commercial department of the Board of Trade continued to exist. In 1872 that department of the Board of Trade was abolished; and he thought it was generally understood at that time that steps would be taken of such a nature as to constitute what he might call a true department of Trade at the Foreign Office. A further change, he believed, had since occurred; but the net result of all the alterations had been that in the opinion of the commercial Bodies of the country the department was not yet in a satisfactory condition. He gave instances showing that official information on important subjects was not obtained at the Foreign Office until many weeks and even months after it had appeared in the newspapers; and occasionally there was also delay experienced in the publication of those interesting Reports which were received from our various Consuls abroad. He referred to cases in connection with the imposition of duties on goods in Russia and Austria, more particularly in the iron trade, in one of which the Foreign Office did not appear to be in possession of information until five months after it could have been obtained. [Mr. BOURKE inquired what particular instance the hon. Member referred to.] He referred to an inquiry as to the duties which under the most favoured nation clause were leviable by Austria on machinery. He imputed no blame to the heads of the Foreign Office; but it seemed to him that there was a want of force within the department itself to deal with those questions, and that if it had been more fully and adequately organized he had no doubt they would have dealt with these and other matters with greater promptitude. It was not possible for a private Member of the House to say what the constitution of the department should be; it was the business of the Foreign Office so to constitute itself that each department should be fully capable of meeting the requirements of that portion of the business which was entrusted to it. When the question of the admission of gentlemen to the Foreign Office Diplomatic Service was discussed in the House a short time since, the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Bourke) pointed to the great facilities which existed in the Office for mutual interchange, and exemplified this by referring to the ease with which gentlemen had been withdrawn from their duties to accompany Lord Salisbury on his recent diplomatic mission. It occurred to him (Mr. B. Samuelson) at the time, that that remark did not apply to the commercial department. He wished to ask the Under Secretary if it were true that a gentleman who was actively engaged in the business of the Commercial department had been appointed a Commissioner to negotiate the Treaty of Commerce with France, and that he would be accompanied by Sir Louis Mallet. A more judicious selection could not be made; but would the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs assure the House that the places of the gentlemen to be sent from the department could be as well and as readily supplied from the general staff as the places of those gentlemen who had been taken from the Foreign Office to accompany Lord Salisbury to Constantinople? It should be remembered that France was not the only country with which we were likely to be in negotiation at this time for a Commercial Treaty. A new Treaty must be made with Italy, and our Commercial Treaty with Austria, signed on the basis of the most favoured nation clause, was only of short duration. With these three countries we had a commerce amounting to nearly £100,000,000 sterling, and there should be no want of strength in a department having charge of matters of so much importance. He thought he need say no more in order to point out how important it was to have a properly organized department to deal with transactions of that kind. These were matters which could not be delayed, for he believed that loss had already accrued to this country with regard to the neglect of the renewal of the Treaty with Austria. As he was unable to conclude with a Motion, he would only say that if he had raised the question, it was not because he accused the Foreign Office of any breach of duty. There was only a want of strength in that department which required to be supplied. If he were asked what remedy he should like to have applied to the existing state of things, he would reply that it was much more important that an Under Secretary should be appointed for the department in question than that a new legal Under Secretary should have been appointed at the Foreign Office. He would be glad to hear that something was being done to increase the working power of the department, and he trusted that the Under Secretary would be able to give the House some satisfactory assurances on the subject.

said, that it was the duty of each Member of the House to do all he possibly could in order to preserve and extend that commerce which had made this country what it was in the eyes of the world. It had been said that the commerce of England had attained to the highest point which it was destined to reach; but he hoped and believed that that would not be found to be the case. At any rate, we should certainly take care not to allow ourselves to fall behind our neighbours. The feeling of the commercial community was that the Foreign Office gave a little more attention to politics and diplomacy than to commerce. That might be a wrong impression, but it was an impression which existed; and if the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs could disabuse the public mind of that idea he would render a distinct service. Commerce was the life-blood of the country, and certain he was that the House would not refuse to strengthen this department of the Foreign Office in any way which the Government might think necessary.

called attention to the several cases of inconvenience arising to the trade of this country, owing to the want of Diplomatic or Consular relations between Great Britain and Mexico. Our trade with that country was somewhat considerable. He believed the imports valued last year some £700,000 or £800,000, and the exports to us some £800,000 or £900,000, and that trade could be largely increased if official relations were re-established between the two countries. There was, he knew, some little difficulty in the way of bringing about an understanding in consequence of some point of honour or punctilio between this country and Mexico; but surely from the position which England held she could readily afford to make the advances which would terminate the existing dispute. He hoped that the Foreign Office would give their serious attention to the subject, with the view of taking some steps to remedy the present state of things and bring about one which would promote the interests of both countries.

said, he was personally in favour of the establishment of a separate Department of Trade and Agriculture; but until that was possible he wished the House of Commons would give such assistance to the Foreign Office as would strengthen it and enable it to meet any emergency that might arise. He could say for himself and for those with whom he acted, who were connected with Chambers of Commerce, that they had always found the Foreign Office ready and willing to co-operate with them in all matters which they had occasion to bring under the notice of that Department. Their letters were promptly answered, and every possible information was cheerfully given. There could be no doubt, however, on the other hand, that the Staff of the Foreign Office required to be strengthened, and that the branch of it which was connected with Trade and Commerce was entitled to claim the services of a Secretary of its own. Lord Tenterden, of whom he could not speak too highly, had devoted some of the time which he could spare from other matters to commercial subjects, but the Foreign Office had to draw on the Indian Office in cases of emergency—for instance, in the late Conference at Constantinople and in the negotiations for the new French Commercial Treaty. In regard to the question of diplomatic relations with Mexico, he had been requested by a large number of merchants trading there, or who might wish to trade there, earnestly to press the question upon the attention of the Government. He, therefore, desired to support the suggestion of his hon. Friend the Member for Swansea, having no doubt that the re-opening of Diplomatic or Consular relations between England and that country would be of great advantage to the trade of each. He was glad to see that France was meditating a restoration of diplomatic relations with Mexico, and he hoped that Her Majesty's Government would be able to co-operate in the endeavour which the French Government seemed disposed to make.

said, he did not think that either the hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) or the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Samuelson) could have cause to complain of the fact that a division was not possible upon the questions they had brought under notice, because it was clear that upon both subjects there was not much difference of opinion in principle. In regard first of all to Mexico, of course every one must wish that our relations with foreign Powers should be as amicable as possible, and also that every facility should be given for increasing as much as possible our commerce with foreign countries. What was so much to be regretted was that when our relations with Mexico were broken off, they were broken off in a manner which rendered it almost impossible for the British Government to initiate any step to restore them. What happened was, that in 1867, when the revolution in Mexico came to an end, the Mexican Government refused in the most arbitrary manner to have any communication whatever with those Powers which had diplomatically recognized the Emperor Maximilian, and not only did they break off these relations, but they declared all Treaties made with those Powers to be null and void. He did not mention these facts for the purpose of widening the breach between ourselves and Mexico, but in order to show how it was that the Government was prevented from renewing the negotiations. And until some advance was made by Mexico it was considered by many persons impossible to restore the former relations. They had, however, told many persons, and he was free to state, that if the Mexican Government by itself or through the mediation of another Power, made proposals for the restoration of the relations which once existed between their own country and England, Her Majesty's Government would be disposed to meet those proposals in a friendly manner. With the exception of the few cases referred to by the hon. Member for Swansea he had not heard of any hardships inflicted upon British commerce with Mexico owing to the fact that we had no Consular representative there. Our Consular business had, since the rupture of the relations, been conducted by the United States Consul. It would, without doubt, be advantageous to have Consular representatives of England at the Mexican seaports; but the condition of affairs in Mexico was such that it would not be desirable to place Consular officers in the interior of a country the Central Government of which was not likely to give to such officers the protection which they had a right to require. In a despatch of Lord Derby's he said that Her Majesty's Government had no wish to be on any other but friendly terms with Mexico, both countries having interests in common, and that any communication from the Mexican Government would receive the most friendly consideration. With regard to the subject to which the hon. Member for Banbury had referred, he was glad to give him the warmest thanks for the manner in which he had spoken of the Commercial department of the Foreign Office. It would tend to encourage that department in the efficient performance of its duties. The hon. Member had, however, stated that the commercial community of the country was dissatisfied with the manner in which the business of the department was managed. He (Mr. Bourke) could not think, judging from the small number of hon. Members present, that this was a perfectly accurate representation of the facts. He agreed in the opinion which had been expressed, that the prosperity of the country turned on the mode in which its commercial relations were managed. With regard to the reorganization of the Office which had been made, he had never heard that the commercial Bodies of the country were dissatisfied with it. It was true that in former times when the business was divided between the Board of Trade and the Foreign Office, the work was not done in a satisfactory manner, but since the re-organization of the department in 1872 a much better state of things had existed. As far as the question of tariffs which had been raised was concerned, he could only say that it involved considerations which could not be dealt with offhand, but that careful attention should be paid to the points which had been laid before the House. The hon. Member had made allusions to the examinations for the Diplomatic service, and had inquired whether any interchange of duties could take place. There was no difficulty on that subject. The organization of the Commercial department of the Foreign Office was exactly the same as that of any other of the departments, and there was not the least difficulty in transferring a clerk from one department to another, although such transfers did not often take place. So far as regarded the constitution of the Commercial department, it was organized exactly in the same way as any other department of the Office, and it would not be possible to put an Under Secretary at the head of one department without putting a similar officer at the head of the other departments. The commercial Bodies who came up to London had no complaint to make of the way in which the business was transacted, and under those circumstances he certainly did not think a sufficient case had been made out for a change. He, at the same time, was glad that the hon. Member for Banbury had had an opportunity of bringing the subject before the House, because he was quite sure his noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Office would pay every attention to the debate and would not, if he saw necessity for it, hesitate one moment to increase the staff. He could not, however, hold out the hope, seeing the way in which the work of the office was done, that any great charge would be made in the organization of the Commercial department. Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

said, that there was a very large increase in this Vote. It began very moderately with a sum of £2,000, and it had gone on growing, growing, growing ever since.

remarked that these Votes were taken under a Treasury Letter, dated May 24, 1866, which, in addition to a previous expenditure of £119,000, authorized a further expenditure of £195,000. The House ought to be informed how much of that sum had been already taken. One of the items in the present Vote was £3,000 for the enlargement of a sketch by Mr. Leighton, and he thought some explanation on that subject was duo to the House. He complained of the manner in which the accounts of the Science and Art Department were presented to Parliament. They were not submitted to Parliament, as was the case with the British Museum. It was a Chinese puzzle to him to know how this money had been spent.

gave some explanations as to the purposes for which the different items were intended. £1,390 was required to decorate the Refreshment Room, the South Court, and the Lecture Theatre, the other item of £1,320 was to discharge outstanding claims in respect of decorative works on the Lecture staircase.

objected to Votes which seemed only proposed for the purpose of gratifying the extravagant whims of the original designer.

wished to know whether the contracts for the various buildings were submitted to public tender?

was of opinion that the expenditure on the South Kensington Museum had given the greatest satisfaction to the general public.

said, that all the buildings at South Kensington were the subject of tender and contract, and the greatest care was taken that the work should be executed by responsible builders, and at the lowest possible cost. The enlargement of a sketch by an artist could not, however, be made the subject of tender. The whole amount of the sum mentioned by the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Jenkins) had been spent on the buildings which were completed. The expenditure now required for the construction of an Art library had been rendered necessary by the removal of the old building, which had become unsafe.

said, this was the commencement of an expenditure which, they were informed, would amount to £80,000, and possibly would come to as much more. They had already spent only £735 on this Art library, and they ought to pause before they committed themselves finally to the enormous expenditure which was contemplated—namely, 271,607—and which he looked upon as unnecessary. He moved that the Vo to be reduced by the sum of £5,000 in respect of the Art library. Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum, not exceeding £7,664, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for erecting and maintaining new Buildings, including Rents, &c., for the Department of Science and Art."—(Mr. Dillwyn.)

said, this country possessed the most magnificent Art collection in the world, but it was crowded into insufficient rooms, and a new building was absolutely necessary. While the Government were not prepared at present to proceed rapidly with the work in question, on account of want of funds, they thought it desirable to incur some expenditure, so as not to disband a number of skilled artificers who were at present employed.

considered the explanation of the right hon. Member (Mr. Noel) unsatisfactory. He thought this Vote was neither one thing nor another. The Government ought to determine to go on and finish the work out of hand, or they ought not to touch it at all.

also supported the reduction of the Vote, and wished to know under what circumstances this large expenditure commenced, and what it was to lead to.

said, that considering the state of the revenue, and the diminished confidence of the people in the South Kensington establishment, the House would do well to endeavour to stop this increasing expenditure.

said, that the question of enlarging the Art library had been pressed on the Government last Session by several hon. Members. An hon. Gentleman opposite had asked him whether it was not the fact that the health of the students suffered in consequence of the confined room in which they had to study. [Cries of "Name!"] He did not remember the name at that moment; but he recollected the question having been asked, and that it caused him to pay a special visit to the library, where he found that the allegation was correct, and that many of the students had suffered materially from overcrowding. This building was required for Art education, and was constantly being used by artizans, students, and others; and it was necessary that it should be put into a good condition. Part of the building was at present dangerous for the safety of the collection of engravings, and that danger ought to be removed.

thought the Committee ought not to interpose its vote, and prevent a place being built for the study of high Art; but was this building really required?

said, the present building must be replaced, and it would be foolish to do that in an unworthy manner. The plan had been adopted by the Government, and this was part of a larger scheme.

thought the library might be a very sensible thing; but he objected to money being spent for the purpose in driblets, and recommended the withdrawal of the Vote till the Government decided whether the work was really to be carried on.

pointed out that the Government were proceeding on the lines which hon. Members opposite wished, and had specially urged upon him last year. It was part of a great scheme, and this was not a Vote taken for something which had not been well considered.

hoped that the Committee would not be put to a division. He understood that this library was necessary for the use of artists and artizans, and they could hardly say that the work should be done in an incomplete manner.

understood that the Works Department had had to put pressure upon the Treasury, and that the Treasury had acceded with a bad grace. He hoped that the Committee would now put their foot upon this Vote, and not yield as the Treasury had done. It seemed to him that they were having an extravagant building.

said, he had referred to the authentic record of their proceedings, and he found that the junior Member for Sheffield (Mr. Mundella) last year spoke of the absolute necessity of providing library accommodation at South Kensington. The then First Commissioner of Works (Lord Henry Lennox) responded in a manner to meet the very reasonable view of the hon. Member for Sheffield, and, doubtless, of other hon. Members opposite; and the Vote was in fulfilment of that promise.

said, that what he objected to was not that the expenditure asked for should be demanded, but that it should be asked for by a sort of side-wind, instead of being honestly set forth to the Committee under its proper designation in the first instance. There was great expenditure at the South Kensington Museum for engravings, whilst there was at the British Museum a fine collection of engravings, which it was very difficult to got to see. If they were to spend £80,000, according to the original estimate, for the Art library and facade, a full statement ought to be made to the House.

asked whether the new building would cover the whole of the ground on the south side of the quadrangle? If so, it was a moderate sum for such a purpose.

said, it would not cover the whole of the ground. The plans could be seen.

asked whether the new building was really wanted? Many of the sums expended on South Kensington had been the cause of grave public scandal, and it was right that the present proposal should be properly investigated.

said, that last year's Supplementary Estimates included a Vote for £3,500 on account of the Science and Art Library and façade, and there was distinct notice given that it was proposed to spend £80,000. [Mr. DILLWYN: When was that?] That was in July.

I hope it will be a warning to the House not to take Supplementary Estimates in July again.

said, he would not object to the Vote, if the Committee could see the plans, and know exactly what was proposed to be done by the Government.

asked, whether the voting of the £5,000 would pledge the House to the expenditure of £80,000?

wished the Vote postponed, as they did not know what had been done.

thought it would be satisfactory to know what the country was getting for the £80,000.

also desired information as to what the £80,000 comprised.

trusted that the Committee would come to a decision on the matter, which he must again say had been well considered. The sum asked for now was only a portion of the amount that would be required, though no doubt the voting of a part did commit the House to the whole. What was intended was to provide an Art library and a reading-room for students to go to. He understood last year that the House had agreed to the expenditure of £80,000; but he could not pledge himself that that sum would cover the whole cost of the building. The Art library was, he believed, an institution quite unique in England. It was perfectly free, and advantage was taken of it not only by artists and those connected with Art in higher positions in life, but also, he was informed, largely by working men. It would not be worthy of the country to have a building of a shabby character, and it was proposed that it should be constructed with good terra-cotta ornament, after the manner of the quadrangle, with which hon. Members were familiar. The whole sum would be expended on the Art library and the reading room, and in making more safe their depositories of articles in the Museum. The House having voted the sum taken for commencing the work, it would hardly now refuse what was required for continuing it. Any hon. Member who wished to see the plans could see them at South Kensington. Question put. The Committee divided:—Ayes 30; Noes 88: Majority 58.—(Div. List, No. 59.) Original Question put, and agreed to. (10.) £133,500, Surveys of United Kingdom.

asked, whether any steps had been taken, or wore about to be taken to complete the survey of North Wales?

asked, when it was probable that the survey of Scotland would be completed? It was begun 40 years ago, and he thought there was no more extravagant method of spending money than spreading it in this way over a long series of years. He should be glad to learn from the Chief Commissioner of Works when the survey would be completed, and how soon the country would have the advantage of getting any return for the money which had been expended during so long a period. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to give an assurance to the country that the survey of Scotland might be expected to be completed at an early date.

said, that the survey of many of the counties of North Wales had been discontinued. Precedence had been given to the mineral districts; but as they had been surveyed, the staff had been withdrawn to be employed elsewhere. The whole of the main land of Scotland had been surveyed. The survey of the Shetland and Orkney Islands, which would complete the general survey, was now in progress. Vote agreed to.

asked why there had been a diminution of £30,000 in the Vote?

said, that the estimate of expenditure had been heretofore taken at an approximate amount. It was only recently that the Government had been able to get at anything like a correct amount, which accounted for the apparent decrease. Vote agreed to. (14.) £1,000, Wellington Monument.

asked when this monument would be completed? He asked the same question when he entered the House in 1866, 15 years after Wellington's death, and he was then informed by the First Commissioner of Works that the monument would be completed in the course of a year or two; and the same answer had always been given in subsequent years to the same question. From what he could see, however, when he visited St. Paul's last week and looked through the cracks of the scaffolding surrounding the monument, it would be some time yet before the work would be completed. He must again say he should much like to know when it was likely to be finished.

replied, that he went to St. Paul's about a month ago, and on inquiry he was informed that the monument, which had been 25 years in hand, would be completed in six weeks or two months from that time.

inquired whether the original ridiculous design by which an equestrian figure of the Duke surmounted the canopy over his recumbent figure, was to be carried out. He would advise that the pedestal which had been placed over the baldachino should be removed, as the monument would be quite complete without it.

stated that the equestrian statue would not be erected. He was diffident about expressing any opinion upon it in that critical Assembly; but he thought when the monument was completed and was thrown open to the public that it would be found to be a noble one, and well worthy of the illustrious man whose memory it was intended to perpetuate. Did the hon. Gentleman wish the pedestal to be left or removed?

hoped that the pedestal would be removed.

said, that the object of the hon. Member for Rochester, whose presence the House always enjoyed, was to inquire when the pedestal was to have a figure on the top of it, and he trusted the hon. Gentleman would long continue to be a Member of the House to ask the same question.

remarked that if the hon. Gentleman would prefer that he should put his observations in the form of a question to the House he would oblige him.

said, he would not pledge himself to remove the pedestal without grave consideration. Vote agreed to. (15.) £70,000, Natural History Museum. In re ply to Mr. DILLWYN, Mr. EDWARD JENKINS, and Sir HENRY HAVELOCK,

explained that although the architect's estimate had been £350,000, yet when the contract came to be given out, it was found it would have to be increased to £395,000. Of the £80,000 voted last year, only £70,000 had been expended, and hence only £70,000 was asked for in the present Vote, which was a decrease of £10,000. The sum which remained to be voted would be sufficient to complete the building. Vote agreed to. Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum, not exceeding £10,825, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the Metropolitan Police Courts."

asked if that was the sum of money to be contributed towards the purposes of the police courts themselves, as regarded maintenance, or was any part of it a grant in aid of the erection of those buildings in London.

said, that the amount was not a contribution towards the maintenance of the courts, but that £5,000 of it was towards the erection of Bow Street police court, the entire cost of the work being a charge on Votes of Parliament.

hoped the Committee would refuse to pass the estimate. They had £5,000 now asked for without the slightest information as to the total amount required. This coming down to the House for grants from the Consoli- dated Fund to aid the metropolis in the matter of police courts was open to grave objection. He would like to know why Liverpool and other large towns should not come down for grants. He thought the policy was one that could not be maintained. He would like to know, whether the Government could inform the Committee what the total cost would be? He begged to move that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £5,000. Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum, not exceeding £5,825, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, fox the Metropolitan Police Courts."—(Mr. Rylands.)

said, he could not give the information. The present police court was not adequate, and a new one was required.

thought that means should be adopted in cases like the present for showing what the entire cost would be, and that might be done by a separate column. By voting the sum of £5,000, the Committee could not know to how large an expenditure they might be committed. He objected to the Committee being asked to vote £5,000 when they had no information given to them as to the total cost of the new court. It might turn out that it would be £40,000 or £50,000, and it was in this sort of way that the House got committed to large expenditure. A vote of this sort was taken to begin with, and next year the Committee would be told they had sanctioned the first Vote and were bound to go on.

agreed with the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands), that the metropolis should be subjected to the same rules as other places.

reminded the Committee that the metropolitan police courts had a claim on the Exchequer which provincial courts had not, as as a great deal of business was done in the metropolitan courts affecting the whole country as well as London, and the fees received there were paid into the Exchequer, whereas the fees in the borough courts belonged to the municipalities.

said, that as well as the entire amount, they ought to know the object of this expenditure; whether it was for the site of a court, or for the building.

said, the £5,000 was for pulling down the old building and commencing the new one. At present, no definite estimate could be arrived at, and from what was said on the subject last, year it was thought advisable that no time should be lost.

thought it was quite time a new police court should be built at Bow Street. The state of the police cells in which the prisoners were placed in the morning while waiting to be brought before the magistrate was disgraceful. The late Sir Thomas Henry had frequently spoken to him on the subject. He had examined them, and could say that they were not fit for a man to be kept in for five minutes. He should like to know whether any improvement of them was contemplated.

said, that these buildings should be erected; but Parliament ought to have some estimate of the cost before this Vote was taken.

said, the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman placed the Committee in a worse position than before, leaving it quite uncertain what was to be paid, as no estimate had yet been made.

admitted that an estimate ought to be given, and he was prepared to withdraw the Vote.

quite agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir William Fraser) that the cells in the metropolitan police courts were not such as they ought to be; but a great improvement had been made within the last two years, and it was the anxious desire of the Commissioners to continue their improvement. The cells under the jurisdiction of the First Commissioner of Police, in which night prisoners were confined, were generally in a satisfactory state.

could not help thinking, when he heard so much about the state of the police cells, that some people talked too much of what they did not understand. They were not quite such barbarians in London as people tried to make them out, and the police cells, like the police courts, belonged to a former day, and were not, perhaps, so good as they might be, but they had been improved and would by-and-by be made better. Certain persons had almost lived in them for years and years, and he objected to their being held up to execration in this way by the hon. and gallant Baronet opposite (Sir William Fraser).

explained that he had not spoken of police cells generally, but of those attached to the police courts. Amendment, and Motion, by leave withdrawn. (16.) £120,325, New Courts of Justice and Offices.

complained of the delay in the erection of these buildings. Enough money had not been spent in accordance with previous Votes. £1,181,000 had been expended, principally for the site, £218,000 of which had been expended on the erection of the buildings, leaving a sum of £547,000 to be expended. They were, therefore, paying interest on the £1,181,000 without any result. By the original contract the buildings were to be finished in 1880; but it was quite evident from the little progress that had been made that the contract could not be fulfilled within the time. At the present moment not only had no return been received for a very large expenditure, but the administration of justice was inadequate for the want of proper buildings for its administration, and the evil every year would become more aggravated. He did not blame the Government, the contract having been entered into with their Predecessors; but an expression of opinion on the part of the Committee might be of service. It was evident that the contractors could not fulfil their contract. He hoped that warning would be given to the contractors that they must fulfil their contract, or the penalties would be exacted as sonic return to the public for the expense and inconvenience which would be caused by the non-completion of the work by the specified time.

said, the hon. and learned Member was justified in expressing dissatisfaction at the slow progress made with the building but lately the progress made had been more satisfactory, and the evidence of this was the fact that there had been a Supplementary Estimate for £40,000 to provide the money required for work that had been done. The administrative offices would be completed by the spring of next year. It would be a strong measure to enforce the penalties, but the expediency of doing so would be taken into consideration, and every endeavour would be made to force on the building as rapidly as possible.

considered it was most desirable on all accounts that the building should be completed with as much despatch as possible. The Government were losing something like £40,000 or £50,000 a-year in the shape of interest upon the money laid out upon the site, and they were also compelled to pay a composition to the rates in respect of the buildings pulled down. There was a much more serious consideration, however, than any mentioned by his hon. and learned Friend—namely, the impossibility of bringing the new Judicature system into harmonious operation until these buildings were completed. Vote agreed to. (17.) £1,082, New Palace at Westminster—Acquisition of Lands and Embankments. In reply to Sir WILLIAM FRASER,

said, that no conclusion had been arrived at as to the disposal of the vacant land to the west of the Houses of Parliament. Vote agreed to. (18.) Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum, not exceeding £177,637, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of the several Public Buildings in the Department of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland."

said, he wished to make an inquiry of the hon. Gentleman on the Treasury Bench. In the Vote under the head of Board of Works no less a sum than £29,000 was put down for the labour of the servants of the Board. He asked whether the work might not be more economically done by contract?

said, though the sum was £29,000, yet if the hon. Gentleman turned to the Schedule he would find that it referred to a large number of buildings, and the amounts themselves were very small. The work was executed by contract, as far as possible.

said, in the Vote there were items which ought not to be included at all. For instance, considerable grants for Queen's Colleges were included, and they would more properly come under the head of education.

said, the Vote was set forth in the usual manner.

referring to the Vote of £431 for the Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, said there were other places like the Botanic Gardens which afforded an immense amount of amusement to the public, and also encouraged a taste for flowers, and tended very much to elevate the masses. The Botanic Gardens was a very useful place, and drew an immense population out of Dublin away from the public-houses, and tended very much to the public advantage. But there was another place which was probably of very much more use, and which stood very much in need of some assistance from the Government. He referred to the Zoological Gardens, which were not only celebrated in Ireland, but had acquired a European fame. The breeding of wild animals had been conducted there with very great success, and they had acquired a wide reputation for efficient management. He regretted to say that the amount of support they received from the public was not at all adequate to their deserts and necessities. The Zoological Gardens were very badly in want of houses for keeping the wild beasts, and he hoped the Government would take into consideration between now and next Session the propriety of giving a grant to the Gardens. At a time when they were endeavouring to legislate with the view of keeping people out of the drinking shops, he thought that one of the first things they ought to do was to afford them greater facilities for spending their time in places of harmless recreation. He hoped, therefore, that the Chief Secretary for Ireland would see his way next year to recommending a grant that would enable the parties to provide permanent houses for the animals in the Zoological Gardens. Another point to which he wished to call attention was the frightful state in which the Board of Works allowed the Four Courts of Dublin to remain. The Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer had only lately been incapacitated from discharging his duties by reason of an illness resulting from the filthy, dirty state of the Court in which he sat. When he spoke of the Court of Exchequer, he might apply the same remark to all the other Courts. The state in which they were kept was monstrous, but no order could be obtained from the Board of Works to put the Courts in a proper state either as regarded the condition of the sewage or the ventilation. It was only very recently that it was found impossible for the Judge, jury, or counsel to remain in one of the Courts, it was in so bad a state, arising from the miasma which obtruded into the atmosphere; but although this had been going on for a length of time, the Board of Works could not be induced to make arrangements such as would render the buildings properly habitable. He hoped the Chief Secretary would see that the Board of Works did their duty in this matter.

objected to the way in which these Estimates were set out, as compared with the way in which similar Estimates were brought forward for England. He should have been inclined to object to the Estimates with regard to the Queen's Colleges and other matters, but owing to the way in which the Votes were furnished, he could not go through them without great inconvenience and an unnecessary tax on the time of the House. He would suggest, however, that the Irish Votes should be furnished in the same way as the English Votes.

moved the reduction of the Vote by a sum of £100. He complained that no detailed statement was given of Estimates for expenditure on post offices in Ireland. On a recent occasion, in the city of Limerick, a new post office was built; but the old one was still kept open for the accommodation of the public in that portion of the town in which it was situated. Suddenly that post office was closed, and the business was transferred to a shop in the neighbourhood so small and inconvenient that merchants and professional men had informed him they were afraid to trust important letters to it, and were thereby subjected to considerable inconvenience. The closing-up of the old post office had all the appearance of a job, and had caused much dissatisfaction. He as- sumed the cost of fitting-up the shop as a post office was about £100, and therefore he moved the reduction of the Vote by that amount. He considered it a violation of all laws of economy to make such a removal, and complained that the fact was not set out in the Estimate. Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum, not exceeding £177,337, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of the several Public Buildings in the Department of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland."—(Mr. O'Shaughnessy.)

said, that the recommendation of the hon. Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon), as to the Zoological Society of Dublin had been anticipated, and a sum of £500 was annually granted to that Society. With regard to the Four Courts, he would undertake that the attention of the Office of Works in Ireland should be called to the observations of the hon. Member. If he was rightly informed, however, it was not altogether in the power of the Office of Works to prevent the state of things complained of. If the Liffey was in a better condition it would be much more easy for the Office of Works to undertake to place the Four Courts in a better condition; still, so far as it was in their power to remedy the evils, he would undertake that every effort should be made by them for that purpose. The remarks of the hon. Member as to the closing of the post office in Limerick had taken him and his noble Friend the Postmaster General completely by suprise. His noble Friend was not aware that anything had been done to inconvenience the inhabitants of Limerick, and an inquiry would be made into the particular case mentioned. With regard to the complaint of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Butt), he would do all in his power to make the Estimates generally more intelligible when they were next laid before the House.

withdrew his Amendment. Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

objected to an item of £13,000 for the erection of public elementary schools in Ireland being included in this Vote. They should be placed before the House in the Vote for educational purposes.

thought that the item of £13,000 referred to by the hon. Member for Falkirk was an illustration of the inconvenience alluded to by the hon. and learned Member for Limerick of mixing up Votes which should be kept distinct. The year before last this sum came under discussion with the Education grant, while last year and this year it was placed among the Public Buildings works, with which it really had nothing to do. He also wished to ask the right hon. Baronet, whether the Government were prepared to put the vested schools on the same footing with non-vested schools as regarded Government grants? The non-vested schools managers were empowered to erect residences for teachers, paying half of the purchase money by instalments, Government finding the other half. But the other class of managers did not enjoy the same privilege. He would also like to know, if the Government would make it compulsory on the part of managers to erect residences for teachers?

said, that the reason why the item for schools in Ireland appeared in this Vote was, that the money was expended by the Board of Works in Ireland, and not by the National Education Board as the latter Board had nothing to do with the purchase of land, and the erection of buildings thereon. With regard to the remarks of the hon. Member for Kildare, he did not think it desirable to compel the managers of schools to provide residences for the teachers, but the question whether a system of loans should not be substituted entirely for the present grants in aid of building was one well worthy of consideration. He was expecting a full report on the subject from the proper Department, and that was the reason he had made no proposition with regard to it.

thought that the explanation was not satisfactory, and that this system of expending public money prevented any comparison being drawn between the grants for the three countries.

wished to state that the observations that he made with reference to the compulsory provision of having school residences were made without consultation or communication with anyone, and they represented his own views only. Ho thought that it was just as requisite to provide a residence for the teacher as to find the children with suitable appliances. A grant of money would not be made unless all the arrangements of the school were approved of, and he asked why a grant should be made where a residence was not provided? These were his own views, and he hoped the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not lose sight of this point. Then, with reference to the Zoological Gardens, he was perfectly well aware that the charge for maintenance was included; but the drift of his observations was that some money should be spent beyond the mere maintenance—some small sum of £200 or £300—to do what was necessary for the protection of the animals which they had there for the purpose of amusing and interesting the visitors.

observed that if they were compelled to find residences for the teachers, one-half of the schools in Ireland would be closed, and the teachers would thus be deprived of their salaries. In the interests of the teachers of Ireland he hoped that the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not make this compulsory provision. He was anxious to see residences for the teachers, but he thought that it would be very wrong to shut up all the schools where a residence was not provided for the teacher. It certainly would be a very great advantage to have them if the Government would provide them. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Original Question put, and agreed to. (19.) £11,660, Lighthouses Abroad. Resolutions to be reported. Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum, not exceeding £46,907, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the British Embassy Houses and Legation and Consular Buildings, including Rents and Furniture."

complained that the Government had not, pursuant to a recommendation of the House in 1870, purchased Embassy houses in place of renting them. As matters stood they were constantly exposed to increased rentals, and from the present Estimates it appeared that the rental at Berlin had been increased from £1,500 to £3,000 a-year, which was an extravagant sum, as at St. Petersburg, which was quite as expensive as Berlin, only £1,440 was paid for a better house.

pointed out that there was sometimes an objection to purchase in the event of the price being too high.

said, there were many items in this Vote which required explanation, and he would therefore move that Progress be reported. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Macdonald.)

wished to draw attention to the case of the Embassy house at Rome—["Progress"]—

would have been glad, as this was the last Vote, if the Committee would have consented to have completed its discussion; but as there really appeared to be a desire to debate some of the items, he would not oppose the Motion. Question put, and agreed to. House resumed. Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next. Committee also report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

in moving for leave, said, that at that late hour it was not his intention to take up any length of time in laying before the House the provisions of a Bill which he hoped he might be permitted to introduce to consolidate and amend the Law relating to Factories and Workshops. Before going into the measure at all, he thought it would only be due to the Royal Commissioners who inquired into this matter for a considerable space of time, that he should thank them publicly for their labours, and for the great mass of evidence which they had got together, as well as for the very able Report which they had presented to Parliament. The Acts of Parliament relating to factories and workshops at present were contained in no less than 16 statutes, and the Commissioners were quite right in saying that the first thing to be done was to consolidate the Acts. Anyone who remembered the way in which these Acts had grown, the tentative processes with which they first commenced, the way in which they had been improved from time to time and from year to year, and the way in which they had been extended to different trades and manufactures, and eventually to include workshops—of course, a very much larger scheme—must see that in passing 16 or 17 Acts of Parliament of that kind, the present state of the law must be very much confused, more particularly when it was remembered that all those statutes were full of exemptions of all kinds and descriptions; many of them most inconveniently placed in Schedules to the Acts, and dealt with in such a way as that, at the present moment, it required really a very great amount of study to find out what the law on any particular point really was. Therefore the first object he had in view was to sweep away all these Acts of Parliament and repeal them, and the Bill which he hoped to present to the House would be a consolidation of all existing statutes relating to these matters. He hoped the House would not think the Consolidation Bill too long when he said that the 16 statutes had been placed in 100 clauses. The next question he had to consider was how far he should extend the provisions of the factory law. Of course, that might be done in one of two ways. They might, in the first place, extend them to every person employed everywhere, but that was too wide a field for him to be inclined to enter upon. The Commissioners did, however, recommend certain extensions of the Acts, and that was the other alternative he referred to. They first recommended that he should take the Bakehouse Acts in and repeal them; and he had also extended that recommendation to certain other trades, such as public laundries, shipbuilding yards, and industries of that kind. Now, if they went into the old law they would find, as the Commissioners stated, that it was drawn in three different ways. First of all, there were textile factories, which were dealt with in a most restricted form. Then they had the application of the law in a modified form in the Acts of 1864 and 1867 to other manufactures; and, lastly, there were the workshops, to a certain extent following the same lines, but vastly different in the way in which they were treated, and creating a great amount of confusion between persons working in one class of manufactory and those working in another. It often happened that children sometimes of the same family, and frequently living in the same street, were working in these factories, and great confusion existed as to their hours of labour and matters of that kind. It was, of course, quite impossible in trying to amend the law, to place everybody upon the same level, and if they did they would be inflicting great hardship in many cases. On the other hand, by relaxing other restrictions in certain cases, they would revive many of the evils which the Factory Acts were designed to cure. He proposed to start by dealing with the textile factories. He had taken it for granted that when the Act of 1874 was passed, so far as those factories were concerned, they had arrived at a satisfactory settlement, both as regarded employers and employed, and it was not his intention in this Bill to interfere with that settlement in any way. With regard to the other factories and workshops, he had endeavoured to draw them together as far as possible. He had done away with the limit of 50 hands, which was the dividing line between factories and workshops, than which a more unsatisfactory line of division could not be taken, for it often happened that persons employed 48 hands in order to escape the provisions of the factory law and to remain under the Workshops Act. He had retained in his Bill the names of "factories" and "workshops," and of "manufacturing processes" and "handicrafts," simply as a convenient nomenclature, but the words would have the same meanings in the Interpretation Clause. There could be no doubt, however, that there must be a certain difference between a manufacturing process and handicraftism, and that some dividing line was necessary, because some relaxation must be given in certain trades. He had, therefore, in the Bill called that a factory—he was not now speaking of textile factories—in which there was any steam, water, or other mechanical power used, and he classed all the rest under the head of workshops. When hon. Members read the Bill they would find that both factories and workshops, so-called, were dealt with precisely on the same basis, although in one or two instance there were certain relaxations, which he had referred to as being necessary, in favour of the workshop class. He did not wish to interfere with adult female labour any further than was necessary, and therefore he proposed to allow women their own hours; and he did not think it was wise to restrict adult women working where there was steam, water, or mechanical power. The other restrictions were of slight importance. Then came the question of how they were to meet the case of domestic factories, where a man had his workshop in his own family, and in regard to that the hours of labour alone would be dealt with. But so far as sanitary measures went, it was very much better, in his opinion, to leave them under the Sanitary Acts. He did not interfere with that or the question of their meals or their registration, because he did not think it was possible to have a sufficient staff of Inspectors to carry it out. These were the main lines upon which the Bill had been drawn. He would now very shortly explain the working of the Bill. The first part of the Bill was given entirely to what he called the law of factories—that was to say, where there was nothing but an ordinary factory or workshop the whole law was given very simply. He would now run over the heads very shortly. There was a provision as to the prevention of the escape of effluvia or anything offensive from a drain; secondly, a provision as to the fencing-in of machinery and matters of that kind; and then they came to the point of meal hours, in which case he had drawn a distinction between the textile and non-textile factories keeping the textile factories to the Act of 1874. There was a great change made in the hours concerning those employed in workshops, because they were thrown into the same category except in the case of adult women, who would remain as at the present moment. With regard to the clause relating to the holidays, and the clause with regard to education, and also with regard to certificates for fitness, and certified surgeons, and to accidents, that was the whole law simply put in the first 33 clauses of the Bill for the ordinary model workshop or factory. He treated them all in the same manner, so that members of the same family and of the same neighbourhood, though working at different places, would be pretty much on the same footing. He next came to the second part of the Bill, which referred to particular classes of factories and workshops. He was alluding to those exemptions which formerly were put at great length in Schedules—exemptions which enabled certain factories at certain times to work at from 8 to 8 and from 9 to 9, instead of from 6 to 6. But there were one or two points of importance in which he had treated those exemptions in a different way from the present law. In the first place, no exemption for the future could be given to an individual manufacturer. The exemption, where it applied at all, applied to a class of manufacturers or a locality, and the reason for the exemption was shown in the Bill. A man did not apply as he used to do to the Inspector for leave; but the exemption was placed in the Bill itself, and the trades to which the exemption applied would be found in the Schedules of the Bill; and the Secretary of State had also power, if he thought fit, for special reasons pointed out in the statute, to extend the exemption to special trades. There were also special clauses in the Bill to show that where these special exemptions were allowed certain special provisions would be added, in order to avoid certain special dangers, as a condition of manufacturers availing themselves of the exemptions in the statute, and before any manufacturer could avail himself of any of these exemptions he would be bound to fix in the factory a notice of his intention to do so. There was a further exemption to which he would allude, and that was as to the question of hours; because there was a class of persons whom he thought it was necessary to deal with in the second part of the Bill, and that was the class of persons engaged in bleaching and dye works. There would be a great objection to putting them on the same footing as persons employed in textile factories, because textile factories had always hitherto stood by themselves, and there had never been in a textile factory any of the exemptions to which he had alluded; therefore, he had put bleaching and dye works in the second part of the Bill, because they had certain exemptions which it was almost necessary they should have by the peculiar circumstances of their trades, because in the trades in which they were employed they could not stop at a moment's notice. They had, by law, an extra half-hour for certain processes, and if that was not granted, the whole of their trade might be put a stop to. Then came the question of hours, and looking to all the circumstances, as to the character of the trades and the engagement of the children of the same families working, some in one, and some in another factory, he proposed that the hours in bleaching and dye works should be the same as the hours in textile factories. That was the course which he had adopted, after much discussion, and he felt sure that it would give great satisfaction to the country. The third part of the Bill took up the administration of the law. He wished to add very little, if at all, to the number of Inspectors, but there was one matter that must be altered, and that was that the whole inspection should be under one head. They had—as hon. Members were aware—at present two co-ordinate jurisdictions in the factory administration. For both the gentlemen exercising it he had the highest regard and esteem; they were both most admirable public servants; they had worked the Acts most judiciously, and deserved the thanks and praise of the country. At the same time he thought that for the future carrying on of the work it would be very much better to have all managed by one head. That really was the Bill. And he hoped that hon. Members when they came to read it, would see that it was clear, and that its provisions were easy to be understood, that no mistake was possible as to the provisions affecting any particular trade, and that it would practically put an end to the confusion which now existed. He had endeavoured to take care that masters should be responsible for the health, safety and comfort of those under their charge, and he hoped on the other hand, that those who were employed would find that they had every consideration, not only for their health and safety, but for their education, and would be satisfied with the change. He did not think he should be justified in taking up any longer the time of the House. Although he had altered the scheme, he had preserved the spirit of the old law, and had endeavoured in the Bill to consolidate it on broad and general principles. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in the Bill.

said, the measure proposed was of too much importance to be discussed at that hour. He must, however, express his satisfaction that the Home Secretary was going to stand by the educational clauses of the Factory Act of 1874. There was an important exception, however, as to the regulations affecting children in regard to hours of labour and education. He referred to children employed in agriculture. The effect of the Bill would be that children employed in textile manufactories—say, in a village in Yorkshire—would be educated from the age of 10 to 13; while children, perhaps of the same family, employed in agriculture would only be educated up to their 10th year. He thought the House should recognize the fact that education was as important in the one case as in the other, and he wished to know if there was any intention on the part of the Government to supplement this Bill by another, in order to improve the education of agricultural children. If the right hon. Gentleman should find it inconvenient to answer at once, he (Mr. Fawcett) would ask the question on a subsequent occasion.

said, that by the Bill one great inequality remained untouched. He should therefore on the second reading move the following Resolution:—

"That, in any measure for the consolidation and amendment of the Law relating to Factories and Workshops, it is desirable, in the interests alike of employers and employed, that all trades and manufactures employing the same class of labour should be placed on the same footing, and under the same protective and restrictive regulations."

congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on having placed the whole inspection of workshops and factories under one head. There were several matters which, he considered, would be defects in the working of the measure, but he would, at the present, abstain from expressing any general opinion upon its merits. That he thought the proper course, as, from a mere statement as to what a Bill was, they were often drawn into making statements they often had cause to regret. He should like to know when the Bill would be in the hands of hon. Members.

said, that the Bill had been printed for some time, and he hoped it would be in the hands of hon. Members by the beginning of the week—say, Monday or Tuesday next. He would not propose the second reading until the country had had an opportunity of considering the provisions a the Bill—namely, on Thursday, the 26th April. Motion agreed to.

Bill to consolidate and amend the Law relating to Factories and Workshops, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Secretary CROSS and Sir HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON.

Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 123.]