I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, in sending the troops now said to have been telegraphed for by the Khedive and Dervish Pasha, the Sultan will do so as Sovereign of Egypt or as mandatory of the European Powers; and, in either case, whether any and what guarantee has been taken by the Powers that the intervention thus made by the Porte shall be strictly limited to, and cease with, the suppression of the present revolutionary movement?

Sir, I think it only courteous to the hon. Member to say that I shall not be able to answer the Question. It is, no doubt, an extremely interesting Question, but I shall be quite unable to answer it.

I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the Prime Minister, Whether His Majesty the Sultan has shown any indisposition to take those measures which the Governments of England and France have suggested to him for the restoration of order in Egypt, and to make good the authority of the Khedive; whether he will state the reasons which induced Her Majesty's Government to press the Sultan to consent to a Conference; and whether Her Majesty's Government will join in any demand the Powers may make upon the Sultan to act as their mandatory instead of as Sovereign of Egypt?

I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is true that the officers and men of Her Majesty's ship Superb who were killed in the recent outbreak were buried at sea, and why they were not buried at Alexandria; whether Her Majesty's Government have warned British subjects at Cairo, whose safety now depends upon Arabi Pasha, that they had better leave Egypt; and what arrangements have been made to receive the large number of European refugees now at Alexandria on board the ships of the fleet?

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Greek Government have yet instituted the long promised inquiry into the murder of Mr. Ogle; and, if not, whether Her Majesty's Go- vernment will use their best endeavours to secure the earliest possible investigation of the case, and the presence thereat of a representative of this country?

Her Majesty's Minister at Athens telegraphed on the 10th instant that the preliminary inquiry into the circumstances of Mr. Ogle's death had been actively carried out, and that the Greek Government wore now prepared to proceed to an investigation at Vole, at which a British Representative would attend. Mr. Merlin, British Consul at the Pircous, will accordingly be present at the inquiry, which will be proceeded with as soon as possible.

asked the Lord Advocate, Whether his attention has been called to the deposition of the bankrupt, Kenneth Mackenzie, examined at Dingwall, in which he deponed that he was indebted to an amount exceeding two hundred pounds, but had no books or accounts, and that such books as he at one time kept ho had burnt within four months of the presentation of a petition against him for cessio, and that he had written to one creditor offering to pay him ten shillings in the pound "if he would pretend to accept two shillings, and not tell the other creditors;" whether, under "The Debtors (Scotland) Act, 1880," it is a crime punishable by imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a bankrupt, within four months next before the presentation of a petition for cessio, to have destroyed or mutilated any book, document, paper, or writing, relating to his property or affairs, or, if his debts exceed two hundred pounds, not to have kept such books or accounts as, according to the usual practice of his business, are necessary to explain his transactions, unless he proves to the satisfaction of the court that he had no intent to defraud; and, why no proceedings were taken by the Crown Office under that statute in Mackenzie's case?

Sir, I have made inquiry into this matter. The deposition of Kenneth Mackenzie was made more than a year ago, on 3rd June, 1881. It contains the admissions set out in the Question. Mackenzie stated that he kept certain books in pencil; but they do not appear to have been proper mercantile books. He was the son of a crofter, residing in his father's house, and had no shop of his own, although he seems to have obtained a quantity of boots and shoes on credit. Ho appears to have been an ignorant man, imperfectly acquainted with the English language. The provision of the Debtors Act is correctly recited in the Question. The case was reported to my Predecessor, and fully investigated by his instructions. The Procurator Fiscal reported that, in his opinion, and that of the Sheriff who presided at the examination, the case was a very trifling one, and the Crown Counsel decided at the time that there were not materials for a successful prosecution.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, If he will state what were the arrears in respect of the permanent income of £293,455 per annum of the Irish Church Fund on the 1st April 1881, and the arrears on the 1st April 1882; and, whether it is proposed by the Government to make any allowance, on the principle of the Arrears of Rent (Ireland) Bill, to the persons from whom this income, consisting of the tithe rent-charge, perpetuity rents, and interest on mortgage, is derived?

The arrears on the permanent income of the Irish Church Fund were, on the 1st of January, 1881, £156,000, and those on the 1st of January, 1882, are estimated at £148,000. These are accumulated arrears. I cannot admit the analogy implied in the latter part of the Question, and as yet no suggestion has been made for remission of the character indicated.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is true that, on the compulsory retirement under 68A. Circular, January 1882, of militia surgeons holding commissions from lord lieutenants of counties, at the age of sixty-five, the pension of six shillings a day, to which, under certain circumstances, such surgeons were entitled to has been refused them; and, if he will explain under what enactment the right to this pension is alleged to have been destroyed?

Sir, in reply to my hon. and learned Friend, I have to state that until 1829 Militia surgeons were members of the permanent Staff, and, like other officers of that Staff, entitled to pensions on reduction of the force, or on retirement through age or infirmity. But no Militia surgeon appointed since 1829—that is to say, during the last 53 years—has been entitled to a retiring allowance. Her Majesty has always had the power to decide at what age Militia officers should cease to serve, and in 1872 this age was fixed at 60, although retirement was not enforced in every case. In 1881 it was decided that at 65 all Militia surgeons must retire, this being a boon to them compared with other Militia officers.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, When he proposes, in pursuance of his promise of March 10th, to bring in a short Bill to again place owners of small tenements in the same position as regards highway rates as they now are as regards poor rates, and in which they were as to highway rates before the repeal of the 13 and 14 Vic. c. 99, by the Act 38 and 39 Vic. c. 66?

On Monday, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If there was any special reason for discharging from custody a prisoner named Crawshay Crawshay, who was convicted of fraudulently embezzling public money belonging to the Heston and Isleworth Local Board, at the Central Criminal Court, on 2nd April 1881, when he had only served half his sentence; and, whether he was aware that at the above trial there were seven other similar indictments against the prisoner that were not proceeded with, and that the Recorder, in passing sentence, said,

"Had the Board proceeded with the other Bills, and not recommended you to mercy, it would have been my duty to have sentenced you to penal servitude. You will go to prison for two years with hard labour?"

in reply, said, there were very special reasons for discharging this prisoner Early in the present year the Recorder reported to him that, under the circumstances of the case, the prisoner should not have been convicted; that he had nut had fair play, and that the testimony on which he was convicted was incorrect and misleading; and that, in his (the Recorder's) opinion, all further punishment ought to be remitted. In these circumstances, he had ordered the discharge of the prisoner.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any progress has been made in securing for this Country, by means of the "most favoured nation clause," the advantages obtained by France and Germany in the Treaty recently made by them with the Government of Spain; whether he is aware that the difference between the terms given to France, and those accorded to nations not having a Treaty of Commerce, is from 35 to 70 per cent.; whether he can state the quantity of Spanish wine imported into Bordeaux during the past year; and, if he is aware that the Spanish wines are reduced in strength, adulterated, and coloured with a certain drug, in order to render them available for the English market?

Sir, Her Majesty's Government are not at present in a position to make public the nature of the exchange of ideas which is now taking place between the two Powers with the view to place their commercial relations on a better footing. I am aware that in the case of some goods the difference of rate of duty referred to does exist. The French official figures for 1881 of the import of Spanish wine into Bordeaux separately are not yet published; but the total importation of such wine was about 5,500,000 hectolitres, or five-sevenths of the imports from all countries. We are aware that both Spanish and Italian wines are largely mixed with French wines and with water, and exported to this and other countries; and, accord- ing to M. Leroy Beaulieu's statement, they are also drunk in Paris; but it does not appear to be usually necessary to colour the mixture in the case of Spanish wines, which are often of very dark colour.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is true, as stated in the "Times" correspondence from Ireland on Monday, that by a singular omission of the authorities the three dragoons appointed to protect the late Mr. Bourke were unprovided with horses, except at the expense of the person protected, the result having been that Mr. Bourke, bringing but one guard with him, and having him upon the same vehicle as himself, lost the advantage which a separate and double guard would have afforded him; whether it is true that in consequence of the regulation that no trooper is to carry his carbine loaded, unless at full cock, the practice is not to load until the occasion arises; and, if so, whether any alteration of the regulations in both matters is contemplated?

asked the Secretary of State for War, with reference to the recent assassination of Mr. Bourke and his escort, Whether it was consistent with the orders given about escorts that only one man should be on that duty; whether Cavalry soldiers employed on escort duty should be mounted or dismounted; what order as to arms of escorts being loaded has been given; and, whether, if Corporal Wallace, of the Royal Dragoons, was married, any special allowance will be made to his widow or family; and, if so, whether such sum will be paid out of the Consolidated Fund or charged on the district in which the murder took place?

Sir, it was no omission on the part of the authorities that the three men appointed to protect Mr. Bourke were unprovided with horses. Neither the Constabulary nor the soldiers employed on protection duty are mounted, as, in point of fact, they could not use their arms so well as when on foot or in cars. There is no intention whatever to make any change in this respect. Mr. Bourke's being escorted by only one man was a distinct violation of orders; and, although this appears to have been done at his own urgent request, it should not have been allowed by the officer in charge. Arrangements are being made by the Irish Government for the escorts being always on a separate vehicle from the person guarded. As to the arms being loaded, the instruction of the Commander of the Forces was that the rifles were not to be carried loaded except when immediate danger was apprehended. Sir Thomas Steele has now issued an order that the men's rifles are to be loaded. With reference to the last part of my hon. and gallant Friend's Question, I am sorry to say that I only this morning have heard that the widow of Corporal Wallace was not on the married establishment, he having married without leave. I will look further into the matter; but I fear that I cannot now say what ought to be done about her.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether his attention has boon called to the unpractical, and even grotesque, nature of some of the Foreign papers set for translation to candidates for the Diplomatic Service; and, whether he sees his way to remedying the evil of the present system?

Sir, no complaint has been made of the nature of the Papers set for translation in examination for the Diplomatic Service; but my hon. Friend, perhaps, alludes to those set in a recent examination of Foreign Office clerks for special acquirements in foreign languages, which appear not of a kind to test the practical knowledge required, and to which the attention of the Civil Service Commissioners has been called.

asked the Postmaster General, If, taking into account that nearly a month has elapsed 6ince ho informed the House that he was considering the application of the London and Globe Telephone and Maintenance Company, Limited, for a licence, he can now state the decision at which he has arrived; and, if not, within what period he expects to be able to announce his decision?

Sir, the question as to the granting of Telephone Exchange licences involves many important and difficult issues. The subject has been for some time engaging my careful attention; and, although I regret that I cannot fix the precise time when I shall be able to announce a decision, I can assure the hon. Member that there shall be no unnecessary delay. I could not, within the limits of an answer to a Question, state the points that have to he considered, nor do I think it expedient that they should now be stated.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the case of Mr. James Sheridan, of Drumhalry, in the barony of Granard, county of Longford, who was, on the 8th May, evicted from his land by the sheriff with a force of Constabulary; whether it is the fact that Mr. Sheridan was served with a writ in August 1881 for four years' rent; whether he then produced a receipt for the greater portion of this rent at the trial, and the plaintiff, the owner of the land, obtained judgment in the Common Pleas Division for one half-year's rent, £12 5s.; whether the sheriff sent Mr. Sheridan a notice that he had an order against him for £12 5s. with 13s. costs; whether Mr. Sheridan paid the amount of rent and costs, and holds the sheriff's receipt for the same; and, whether he can say under what circumstances Mr. Sheridan was evicted from his land on the 8th May?

Sir, Mr. Sheridan's landlady obtained a writ for a sum of £12 5s. The sheriff sold the interest in trust for the landlady. Sheridan did not attend the sale, but afterwards went to the sheriff and asked him to take the money from him and forego the sale. The sheriff consented, but informed Sheridan at the same time that there would be additional costs, which Sheridan agreed to pay, but afterwards refused, on being informed of their amount. Subsequently, the agent got the writ on the sheriff's assignment, the costs not being forthcoming.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the magistrates of the borough of Limerick were given an opportunity of expressing their views to the Government on the state of that city before its late proclamation; whether they have, since the proclamation, addressed a protest to the Irish Government against that measure; whether the grounds of that protest have been considered, and, if not, whether they will be considered, by the Government; and, whether the proclamation was the result of private information in possession of the Government, or of the general condition of the city; and, if of the latter, whether he will state what circumstances of its condition have led to the step in question?

Sir, a letter fully explaining all the facts of this case was addressed by the Lord Lieutenant to the Mayor of Limerick on the 10th instant. If the hon. and learned Member will communicate with the authorities of Limerick he will learn the nature of that letter, which, I think, answers the first three paragraphs of his Question. The city was proclaimed under the Act 6 Will. IV., c. 15, as in a state of disturbance, with a view of extra police being sent there on the recommendation of the County Inspector of Constabulary, after consulting and with the concurrence of the Resident Magistrate permanently stationed there, and the Special Resident Magistrate of the district.

asked whether the proclamation was the result of private information in the possession of the Government or of the general condition of the city?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that Question, I should like to ask whether the Special Resident Magistrate is Mr. Clifford Lloyd?

I have received no information relating to the general state of the city; but I hold in my hand a long list of riots and assaults on the police. This list occupies nearly four pages, and upon looking over it, I see that many of the cases are of a serious nature. As to the letter, I shall be very glad if the hon. and learned Member will communicate with the City authorities.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether his attention has been called to the large number of emigrants landed from time to time in Hull, and to the absence of any suitable lodging accommodation for them; whether his attention has been more particularly called to the case of a lodging-house keeper named Brodie, who was charged at the Hull Police Court on the 16th May with receiving lodgers into his house in excess of the certified number, and who frankly admitted that he offered to take in as many as 500 emigrants, whereas he was only licensed for 73, stating that there was no other course open to him, the evening being wet, and there being some 1,600 emigrants just landed in the town, unable to find accommodation elsewhere; and, whether the Board of Trade will inquire into the state of the lodging-houses in Hull in the interest of the large emigrant traffic passing through that town?

Sir, I have been requested to answer this Question in consequence of a medical inspection having recently been made, by my direction, as to the sanitary state of Hull, in connection with which the condition of emigrants landing there was investigated. I understand from the Inspector that cases have occurred in which the provisions of the Public Health Act in regard to common lodging-houses have been violated in order to provide accommodation for excessive numbers of emigrants. This, however, appears to be altogether exceptional, and as only occurring when the lodging-houses provided for this class have been filled, which, however, is not often the case. The lodging-houses provided for the emigrants he found to be well kept.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, If he is aware that the dissatisfaction of the Custom House clerks with the position they are being placed in by the reorganization is increasing, and that the answers given have not reassured them; if he is aware that they look upon the new position as a direct violation of the conditions on which they entered the service of the Crown, though they are afraid to make individual complaints, believing that a black mark will be set against those who do so; and, what steps he proposes to take to assure the House and the Country that these men are being treated with justice?

We know of no reason that would lead us to suppose that any dissatisfaction exists among the Custom House clerks who have been transferred to the out-door department with the position in which they have been placed by the recent re-organization, nor have they, in our opinion, any reasonable ground for being dissatisfied. There is no ground for saying that the new position of such clerks is in direct violation of the conditions on which they entered the Service of the Crown, inasmuch as there was nothing in those conditions to prevent their being transferred to any other branch of the Customs Department for the good of the Public Service if unwilling to accept pensions. No impediment has been placed in the way of clerks affected by the change making fair and reasonable representations respecting their cases, individually or collectively, either to the Treasury or to the Board of Customs.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether he will lay upon the Table the Correspondence which has passed between him and the Committee of Lloyd's with reference to a proposal to adopt a sixpenny rate for certain telegrams, and an undertaking on the part of the Committee to indemnify the Government against any loss that might accrue from the experiment?

Sir, it is not usual to lay on the Table such Correspondence as that to which the hon. Member refers, and I regret, therefore, that I am not able to comply with his request. I may, perhaps, add that in declining the proposal to which reference is made I was mainly influenced by the opinion that whenever sixpenny telegrams are introduced, they should not be confined to any particular company or association, but that the public generally should participate in the change.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he is aware that the large Zulu deputation which visited Natal in April last, to ask for the release of Cetewayo, included twenty Chiefs and Headmen from John Dunn's territory, and that while they were in Pietermaritzburg Dunn, who had followed them to that town, publicly threatened them with personal violence on their return to Zulu-land; and, whether Dunn's conduct has been brought under the notice of Sir Henry Bulwer?

in reply, said, that Sir Henry Bulwer had sent a full Report with enclosures to the Colonial Office on that matter; but there was nothing either in the Report or in the enclosures which led them to credit the statement that John Dunn had publicly threatened those Chiefs with personal violence. The Papers would be laid on the Table, and the hon. Member would be able to judge of the matter for himself. It was true that the deputation to Natal included 20 Chiefs and Headmen from John Dunn's territory.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is true that the appointment of Mr. Mieville to the Consulship of the Soudan has been cancelled on account of health; and, if so, whether any other appointment has yet been made?

Sir, it has been decided on grounds of health to appoint Mr. Mieville to some other post, and to select another gentleman for the Consulate at Khartoum. No fresh appointment has, however, yet been made.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that workmen were employed last Sunday upon the repairs now in progress at the Continental Hotel, Waterloo Place; and, whether he will take any steps in the matter?

I do not think this is a matter in which I am called upon to interfere.

asked the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether it was not a fact that no steps could be taken in that matter under the 34 & 35 Vict. without the intervention of the police or the stipendiary magistrates of London?

That does not alter the answer I have given.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the election of Poor Law Guardian for the Killenkey Electoral Division of Rathdrum Union, and to the objection made to the return by Mr. John Gaskin, one of the candidates, on the ground that votes were improperly received by the clerk of the union in his capacity of returning officer, Whether it is true that the Local Government Board refused Mr. Gaskin a scrutiny of the voting papers, stating that they were quite satisfied with the explanation given by the returning officer; whether, on being furnished with specific objections by Mr. Gaskin, the Board, in a letter to him dated the 24th May 1882, made the following admission:—

"In regard to Dr. Truell's own votes as landlord, the Board do not think the returning officer ought to have allowed more than six votes, and they are in communication with the returning officer on this subject; but the additional six votes did not affect the final result of the election;"

whether he will now, as President of the Local Government Board in Ireland, order an independent investigation to be held as to the validity and exact number of the votes taken at the election in question; and, whether he has any objection to lay the Correspondence on the subject upon the Table of the House?

Sir, it is very important that the public should be satisfied that elections have been con- ducted according to law, and where there is reasonable uneasiness there is no objection to ordering an inquiry. I have communicated with the Local Government Board to this effect.

asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether it is the case that the proceedings in the bankruptcy of Joseph Magill, late of Belfast, an extensive trader, have been in court since July 1875; that the printworks and property where his business was carried on were sold for £28,000, in June 1880, and possession taken by the purchasers in November 1880; that, during the last seven years, largo sums have been paid into court, now amounting to £20,000, but nothing paid out, except costs to solicitors; whether it is the case that a local solicitor, instructed by creditors, cannot appear in the Bankruptcy Court, where Dublin solicitors have exclusive audience, with such results as stated above; and, whether the Government intend to proceed with a Local Bankruptcy Act this Session?

Sir, this is a most complicated case. The firm, consisting of throe partners, petitioned for an arrangement as to the joint estate of the firm, and Mr. Magill, one of the partners, also petitioned for a like arrangement as to his separate estate, consisting principally of the Whitewell Print Works. Considerable litigation ensued as to the rights of the creditors of the joint and separate estates, and the trading was continued by a trustee under creditors' resolution until the sale of the Whitewell Works in 1880, which was, I understand, the earliest period at which, owing to the depression of trade, a sale could be advantageously had. The purchase money was £28,000, and of this £24,000 was covered by mortgages. Under the conditions of sale the purchasers were let into possession on part payment of the purchase money, and further sums on account have been since paid into Court. Some costs have been paid, but no dividend yet declared. If any creditor has been or is dissatisfied he can bring his complaint at any time before the Court for redress. It is not the case that a local solicitor cannot appear in the Bankruptcy Court in Ire- land. Every solicitor in Ireland has equal right to appear and have audience there. Last Session I did my best to get on the Local Bankruptcy Bill; but this Session the House knows that the state of Business is such that I have little hope of doing anything effectually in this direction.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is one of the Trustees to aid the Sea and Coast Fisheries of Ireland; whether over thirty thousand pounds of charity money collected from the public is lying unproductive in the hands of the Trustees; if he is aware that some years ago the Trustees recommended that the fund should be transferred to the Inspectors of Fisheries, to be lent by them to the sea coast fishermen; and, if ho will take steps to have that recommendation carried into effect?

Sir, as Chief Secretary for Ireland, I am an ex-officio trustee of the charity known as the Trustees to Aid the Sea and Coast Fisheries of Ireland. There is undoubtedly a considerable sum of money —falling much short of £30,000, however you regard it—which is lying unemployed as far as loans to fishermen are concerned. In 1879 the trustees proposed to transfer the trust fund to the Government; but it was found there were difficulties in the way. I hope to have an opportunity of going into this question in Ireland when the Session is over, and consulting with my brother trustees in Dublin as to the best means of making use of any of the trust money that may be available for loans to fishermen.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What are the special qualifications of Colonel Brackenbury for the organization or command of a detective police force in Ireland?

Sir, Colonel Brackenbury has been appointed an assistant Under Secretary to His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, to relieve the Under Secretary of duties relating to police and crime. In this capacity he exercises a general administrative control over the whole of the police in Ireland; but does not supersede the heads of the police in their executive functions. The Government have satisfied themselves that Colonel Brackenbury is a man of exceptional ability and energy. If the hon. Member chooses, I will read the successive positions of trust and difficulty in which Colonel Brackenbury has almost continuously served. ["No, no!"]

asked the Secretary of State for India, If he will lay upon the Table of the House the letter in which Mr. M. Finucane, Bengal Civil Service, resigned the managership of the Durbhunga Raj at the end of 1880, on the ground that he could not conscientiously carry out large proposed enhancements of rent; whether the resignation of Mr. Finucane was accepted; and, whether a relative of the Lieutenant Governor, Sir Ashley Eden, was forthwith appointed in his place manager to the Maharajah of Durbhunga at an increased salary?

Sir, Mr. Finucane was never manager of the Durbhunga Estate. He was lent by Government to assist in completing the survey of the estate under the manager, Colonel Money. Colonel Money is a distant connection by marriage of Sir Ashley Eden; but was selected for the post of manager of the estate by Sir Richard Temple when Lieutenant Governor. Nothing is known of Mr. Finu-cane's letter of resignation. It is believed that he completed the survey on which he was employed.

asked the Secretary of State for India, If it is true, as stated in the Calcutta correspondence of the "Times," that, immediately on the receipt of a communication from him, Lord Ripon caused a measure to be introduced into the Indian Legislative Council relaxing the precautions on the importation of petroleum into India; whether it is true that immediately on the receipt of another communication from him Lord Ripon suspended further progress with the measure in question; whether he will lay Copies of these communications upon the Table of the House; how many members of the Indian Legislative Council were present at the meeting of that body at which the measure relaxing the precautions on the importation of petroleum was introduced, and what were their names; and, whether Government will take steps to secure some representation of the interests of 200,000,000 subjects of the Crown?

Sir, as I have already stated, the measure was introduced in consequence of certain communications made to the Government of India. Its progress appears to have been suspended in consequence of representations which have been made in India, and not, so far as I am aware, in consequence of any communication from me. The correspondence which has passed with the Government of India is entirely telegraphic, and necessarily represents imperfectly the facts which were before me. As soon as it is sufficiently complete to give full information, there will probably be no objection to its production. The Secretary of State has frequently expressed a strong opinion as to the undesirability of carrying on important legislation at Simla in the absence of unofficial members of the Legislative Council; but it is evident that this matter was urgent, and, if dealt with at all, did not admit of delay.

Can the noble Lord give the House any information respecting the number of Members of the Legislative Council, who took upon themselves to move in this matter?

No, Sir; all that we know has reached us by telegraph, and I have already communicated it to the House.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether any, and, if any, what security was taken from the following suspects on their release from imprisonment on reasonable suspicion of having committed crimes of violence; and, if no security was taken, whether the reasonable suspicion was proved to be unreasonable?—

Name of Prisoner.	Prison.	Ground stated for his Arrest in the Warrant. Reasonably suspected of
Thomas Winterscahill.	Galway	Assaulting dwelling houses and assaulting and robbing persons therein by night.
Patrick Quinlan	Limerick	Assaulting and wounding a person by night.
William Quinlan	Limerick	Assaulting and wounding a person by night.
Patrick Murphy	Naas	Arson.
John Ryan	Dundalk	Murder.
Michael Walsh	Galway	Shooting with intent to murder.
Martin Kearney	Monaghan	Maiming cattle.
Bernard Molloy	Armagh	Arson.
James Leavey	Enniskillen.	Arson.
Michael M'Queeny	Enniskillen.	Murder.
Edmund Stewart	Clonmel	Shooting and wounding.
Patrick Gallogly	Monaghan	Breaking into houses by night and assaulting persons therein.
Patrick Beirne	Monaghan	Breaking into houses by night and assaulting persons therein.
John Sheridan	Monaghan	Breaking into houses by night and assaulting persons therein.
Rodger Brien	Monaghan	Assaulting a dwelling house by night.
Cornelius Kelleher	Monaghan	Attacking and injuring a dwelling house.

If the hon. Baronet will consult the Protection of Person and Property Act, he will find that it does not empower the Lord Lieutenant to require a prisoner on release to give any security for his future good behaviour. His Excellency, however, authorizes me to say that in each of the cases referred to in this Question he caused inquiry to be made whether the prisoners could be released without danger to the peace of the district, and based his decision in each case upon a consideration of the result of such inquiry and of all the other circumstances. The hon. Member must remember that these people were never tried, and that there is no public record of the extent to which they were suspected or had participated in the offences which are opposite their names; and it may be that in some instances there were no grounds for the suspicion.

asked whether an undertaking had not been given by the Chief Secretary for Ireland or his Predecessor that persons imprisoned on suspicion of crimes of violence would not be released without being brought to trial?

wished to know whether it was not a fact that a pledge was given by the Predecessor of the Chief Secretary for Ireland that no man should be imprisoned under the Protection of Person and Property Act except on such grounds as would, in the opinion of the Government, have secured a conviction before an impartial jury?

asked whether the Chief Secretary for Ireland would have any objection to put into the form of a Parliamentary Paper the grounds on which the suspicion of His Excellency was founded?

Sir, I can answer no Question as to the discretion of the Lord Lieutenant except in the most general terms. As to whether any pledge was given by my Predecessor, that is a serious question, and one which I cannot answer without Notice.

inquired whether the depositions made previous to the imprisonment of each "suspect" would be produced?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, How many of the tenants evicted last month had made application to the Land Courts?

Sir, I have telegraphed to Dublin to ask to have this information made out. It will take several days to get it.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether in September last Mr. Cookson used the following language to Arabi Pasha:—

"I told him that if they persisted in assuming the government of the country the army must be prepared to meet the united forces of the Sultan and of the European Powers, both of whom were too much interested in the welfare and tranquillity of Egypt to allow the country to descend, through a military government, to anarchy;"

and, whether that language was approved by Her Majesty's Government?

Sir, my hon. Friend is justified in assuming that Her Majesty's Government approve it.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it would be right to conclude, from the Irish Church Funds Return, that on and after 1932 the permanent income of the Commission will be £293,000 per annum; and, whether that income may be safely taken as representing, at the rate of three-and-a-half per cent, a capital of between £8,000,000 and £9,000,000 sterling; and that, therefore, after paying off the National School Teachers' Fund, the Intermediate Education Fund, and the Royal University Fund, in all about £2,900,000, between £5,000,000 and £6,000,000 will still remain available for the Arrears Bill and other purely Irish purposes?

Sir, the permanent income of the Church Fund, as given in the Returns recently presented, is taken from the last Report of the Church Commission, which shows the state of the Fund on the 31st of December, 1880. Its position in this respect had not appreciably altered at the date when the Return was prepared. But it does not follow that the relations between the permanent and terminable income of the Fund will always remain the same. Persons owing rent-charges, rent, or mortgages to the Church Fund, may redeem their liabilities. The terminable income would be thereby increased, and the permanent income diminished. The Government are not prepared to undertake responsibility for the calculation made by the hon. Member. But I must observe that the present value of a capital of £8,000,000 or £9,000,000, accruing 50 years hence, would be only £1,600,000 or £ 1,800,000.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether any order has been or is about to be issued, giving permission to Officers of the Reserve to wear the uniform of their late regiment at Court; or if he will state the decision of the authorities on the subject?

Sir, in reply to the hon. Baronet, I have to state that with respect to the uniform of some classes of Reserve officers orders have been already issued, but not as to all; but full Regulations will shortly be issued.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether Memorials of the established shipwrights of Her Majesty's dockyards, sent in due form through the proper channels, have been received; and, if so, whether any consideration has been given to the subject?

Sir, the Memorials referred to by the hon. Member have been received and carefully considered by the professional advisers of the Admiralty; but the increases of pay asked for by the shipwrights have not been recommended for adoption. A reply has not yet been sent, because it has been customary to defer the announcement of the Board's decision in such cases until after the Estimates have been voted.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, since by sections 146, 148, and 151 of "The Spirits Act, 1880," it is enacted that any person who, in Scotland, sells or exposes to sale spirits, otherwise than in premises for which he is licensed to sell spirits, shall incur a penalty of not less than £25, with forfeiture of the spirits in his possession; that any person who buys or procures spirits from such unlicensed person shall incur a fine of £100; and that any officer or person employed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue who, by any wilful act, neglect, or default, does or permits, or agrees to do or permit, any thing in contravention or evasion of "The Spirits Act, 1880," shall incur a fine of £500, and be disqualified from serving Her Majesty in any office or employment; if he would state what officer or person in the employment of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue is responsible for permitting, and agreeing to permit, a contravention or evasion of this Act, in Peterhead, by three persons allowed by the Excise authorities, after attention had been called to the fact in this House, to sell liquor without confirmation of their certificates, and without licences, as if they were licensed grocers and publicans; and, whether the Commissioners of Inland Revenue intend taking any action in respect of their officer's deliberate breach of section 151 of the Spirits Act of 1880?

Sir, the Hoard of Inland Revenue are alone responsible for the course which was advisedly pursued in the special circumstances of these cases; and, therefore, action will not be taken against any of their officers in the matter. The Board did not grant licences; they only abstained for a short period at their discretion from Excise interference with the sale of liquor, the Justices' clerk having had reason to believe that a further Court would be held about the middle of this month. Any other course of action would have been unjust towards the applicants, who, but for the accidental non-attendance of a quorum in the Confirmation Court, would doubtless have had their certificates fully confirmed past all dispute. If, notwithstanding this explanation, any person should consider himself aggrieved by the action of the magistrates and the Commissioners, it is open to him to contest the matter by proceeding before the magistrates for a penalty for the sale of intoxicating liquor without a magistrate's certificate.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he will favourably consider the case of James Banon, a suspect in Kilmainham Gaol, with a view to his release, who has a large family dependent upon him, and 60 acres of land, without any person to attend to the same during his incarceration, now extending to nearly three months' duration?

Sir, James Banon was arrested on the 11th of April last, and has, therefore, been little more than two months in custody. His Excellency yesterday reconsidered his case, and decided that he cannot at present order his release.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to the manner in which the coroner's juries, in the case of the boy Melody at Ballina, were empannelled; if he can state what compensation the Government has given to the family of Melody, and the families of those who were wounded in the recent affray; and, whether ho can now give the House an assurance that the services of Sub-Inspector Ball, under whose orders the occurrence took place, have been entirely dispensed with?

Sir, the Attorney General has not yet received the depositions in this case. He has telegraphed to the Sessional Crown Solicitor to know the cause of the delay.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered that portion of my Question which relates to compensation to the family of the boy Melody.

Sir, I am advising the Government on this matter, and I have asked them not to come to a final decision until I have had an opportunity of looking into the matter. We had expected before this to have had intelligence on the subject.

In that case I beg to give Notice that next week I shall repeat my Question.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether he has any objection to re-instate Mr. Mathew Murphy, of Milford, county Cork, in the office of postmaster of that town, he being now competent and willing to discharge the duties of the office?

Sir, in reply to the hon. Member, I have to state that certain inquiries are being made in reference to this case, and I am consequently unable at the present time to answer his Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Is it a fact that Mr. John O'Brien, who was arrested in November last, charged with inciting to Boycotting, whereas the real charge against him, by local authorities, and reported to the Castle, was

"Being the ringleader of a riotous mob in the town of Roscrea, on the night of 26th August, 1881;"

if it is a fact that Mr. O'Brien was sent for trial, in company with two others, on said charge; if it is a fact that Judge Barry, at the Kilkenny Winter Assizes, on hearing the evidence of the police, ordered the prisoner's discharge, without going into the evidence for the defence; and whether Judge Barry said, "In this case the police were the real aggressors;" and, whether Mr. O'Brien will now be released?

The charge upon which John O'Brien has been arrested is that stated in the Returns before Parliament—"Boycotting." It is quite true that this man was suspected of having formed one of a mob of persons who assaulted the police in the town of Roscrea on the 26th of August last. Several of the police were very badly injured on the occasion, and two persons were sent for trial at the Winter Assizes as having been engaged in the assault. O'Brien was in custody under the Protection Act at the time of the Assizes, and was not put on his trial. The Crown Solicitor informed me that it was distinctly proved that they were in the mob, but the Judge did not think there was sufficient evidence of participation in the riot, and stopped the case, but that he did not say the Constabulary were the aggressors, nor did he utter one word condemnatory of them. His Excellency has had O'Brien's case under consideration, but finds he cannot at present order his release.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether John and Cornelius Kelleher, William Walsh, and Maurice Gleeson, are still detained in Kilmainham Gaol, although three others, arrested on the same day, in the same district, and on the same charge, have been released; and, if so, why the above-named are not released?

Sir, His Excellency considers every case upon its own merits. He has had the case of the persons referred to in this Question of the hon. Member under consideration, but finds that he cannot at present order their release.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the fact that the extra pay to be voted to the police will include allowances to men not paid off before the 24th April last; and, whether, in that case, there is any reason for refusing to allow the extra amount to Ex-Sub-Constable Walsh, who was not paid off until the 27th April?

Sir, the Inspector General of Constabulary informs me that the words of the Order issued to the Constabulary in reference to the proposed grant are that members of the Force who were serving in the Force on the 24th of April, 1882, will be entitled to participate in the grant. Ex-Constable Walsh was discharged from the Constabulary on the 13th of February, and is not entitled to share in the extra pay.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, How many persons are now in custody in Ireland under the Protection of Person and Property (Ireland) Act of last year; how many of these persons are classified by the Government as being under the suspicion of "personal association with crime;" what is the cause of the prolonged delay in setting at liberty the persons not so classified; and how soon their release may be expected; if he will state the number and names of the persons now imprisoned in Ireland under the statute of the 34th of Edward III.; and, whether the Government will undertake to release those persons, and to abandon the use of the statute?

Sir, the number in custody yesterday was 216. The number of such persons who are charged in the warrants as suspected of being implicated in crimes other than intimidation is 125. The cases are being considered and decided upon by the Lord Lieutenant day by day as rapidly as their due consideration will allow. His Excellency must be satisfied that the release can be made without danger to the peace of the district. I have called for the information asked for in the latter part of the Question, but have not yet received it.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that, on June 13th, two tenants on the property of Mr. Bate, in the county of Wexford, were evicted, and, immediately after the eviction, their houses were burned down by the emergency men who took possession; and, whether, in view of the right of redemption possessed by these tenants, the Government will consent to include such conduct amongst offences as defined by the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Bill?

Sir, these evictions were on title. The holdings became the absolute property of the landlord on his obtaining possession of them, and he had a legal right to destroy the buildings. The tenants did not possess in this case any right of redemption.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is able to state if any person accompanied the honourable Member for Clare on the occasion of his visit to Kilmainham Prison, and what entry was made in connection with that visit in the prison books; whether he has any objection to lay upon the Table of the House a Return of the visits made to the political prisoners in Kilmainham Prison during their incarceration, with the names and dates; and, whether, in any instance, visitors have been admitted to see the prisoners without their names being recorded?

I know absolutely nothing about this matter; but I have asked the hon Member for Clare whether any gentleman went with him on that occasion, and he says that he was alone.

This is not the first time that the Government has been asked about this matter, and I recollect that when I asked a somewhat similar Question about this matter some days ago—["Order!"]—the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland said the Government were ignorant of everything connected with it. ["Order!"]

The hon. Member is entitled to ask a Question arising out of the answer given by the right hon. Gentleman, but he is not entitled to enter upon other matters.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could inform us whether any gentleman was admitted to the prison on the same day as the hon. Member for Clare went, and, if so, whether he was obliged to enter his name in the Visitors' Book?

Yes, Sir, I will inquire.

Perhaps I may be allowed to say that nobody went to Kilmainham with me, and that I have since asked my hon. Friend the Member for the City of Cork whether anybody else went to see him on that day, and he tells me that nobody went.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Why the Report of the Inspectors of Irish Fisheries for 1881 has not been presented; and, if he will take measures to have it in the hands of Members before the Second Reading of the Sea Fisheries (Ireland) Bill on the 28th instant?

Sir, the Inspectors of Fisheries inform me that the Report is all in type, and is now undergoing revision. They expect to have it ready for presentation in the course of a week.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the time has arrived for the release of Mr. Thomas Morrissy and his brother, whose parents have suffered great loss by their imprisonment, and who have been already confined for a period of seven months?

Sir, His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant has had the cases of Messrs. Thomas and Patrick Morrissy under his consideration, and has decided that he cannot at present order their release.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the time has arrived for the release of John Darcey, who has now been incarcerated since June 17th 1881; and, if the Government be not willing to order Mr. Darcey's release, whether they will permit his transfer from Dundalk to Galway Gaol, so that he may be able to communicate with his wife and children, who have suffered severe loss from his imprisonment?

His Excellency has re-considered Mr. John Darcey's case, but finds that he cannot at present order his release. His application to be transferred to Galway Gaol had been considered last December, when it was decided that it could not be acceded to; but the reasons which then applied need not now apply, and the application shall be re-considered.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the time has arrived for the release of Mr. William Keogh, who has been imprisoned since February 10th in Monaghan Gaol, on the comparatively slight offence of preventing the payment of rents; and, whether two suspects from the same district, arrested on a similar charge, were released after an imprisonment of three months?

Sir, His Excellency has ordered further inquiry to be made into Mr. William Keogh's case.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the time has arrived for the release of Mr. Arthur Moloney, who has been detained since January 3rd, and whose business has severely suffered from his incarceration?

Sir, His Excellency informs me that he has Mr. Arthur Moloney's case still under his consideration.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the time has come for the release of Mr. Thomas Cunningham, at present confined in Kilmainham Prison; whether he has been incarcerated since December 29th last; and, whether all the other suspects from the same district (Loughrea) have been already released?

Sir, Mr. Thomas Cunningham has been under detention since the 29th of December last. His Excellency has the case under consideration, and I will let the hon. Member know the result when I hear it.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Lord Lieutenant considers that the peace of Dublin, where he resides, would be endangered by the re- lease of Mr. J. P. Quinn from Enniskillen Gaol; if it is the fact that, although he has been arrested for incitement to non-payment of rent, the Government can show no speech containing such incitement; whether he is aware that Mr. Quinn simply acted under Mr. Brennan, who has since been released, in the Land League office; and, if he can assign any reason for Mr. Quinn's continued detention, now that men holding higher positions in the Land League organization have been released?

His Excellency had this case under consideration on the day before yesterday, and is unable at present to order Mr. Quinn's release. I must repeat to the hon. Gentleman—what I have said in answer to many questions asked from various points of view—that I can enter into no detail in matters referring to the discretion of the Lord Lieutenant.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Has any reparation been demanded for the losses and injuries sustained by British subjects in the late disturbances in Egypt; and, if so, from whom; and, whether Papers cannot be now presented relating to the mission of Dervish Pacha, and the proceedings consequent thereupon?

Before the hon. Baronet answers that Question, I should like to ask another which relates to the same subject. It is, Whether he can give any information as to what steps, if any, have been taken by Her Majesty's Government in regard to the protection of the property of two citizens of Manchester—Mr. Dobson and Mr. Richardson.—who lost their lives in the recent disturbances at Alexandria? I should like also to refer the hon. Baronet, if the House will permit me, to an important telegram sent to me this morning from Alexandria. I may say that I have been waited upon by an influential deputation of merchants largely interested in British commerce in Egypt. They have laid before me telegrams which really describe a dreadful state of things in Alexandria. The telegram is to this effect, and addressed to a friend of mine, who is possessed of ships in Alexandria—

"The Consul asks urgently, and for reasons of humanity, can you obtain permission from buyers of steamships to allow more than two voyages to Cyprus with fugitives? Do your utmost to arrange this matter, and obtain leave for more voyages if possible."

It seems from the report my friend brings me that the people are leaving Alexandria in large numbers. Another friend has a telegram to the effect that European life and property are no longer safe.

Sir,—

Sir, I do not think it is desirable to allow Questions to be interpolated with other Questions. It is not fair to other Members who are waiting to put their Questions. The Question on the Paper to which I will reply is that of my right hon. Friend Mr. Bourke. I may say that no claims have yet been presented. As soon as any such are received they will be referred in the usual manner to the Law Officers of the Crown. The Papers relating to the mission of Dervish Pasha cannot be detached from the rest of the Papers, which will be brought out as speedily as possible. With regard to the promise I made yesterday to the junior Member for Manchester (Mr. Jacob Bright), the Colleague of my hon. Friend (Mr. Slagg), I may say that we have received from the British Consul and Admiral at Alexandria a list of the British subjects reported killed. The list substantially agrees with that which has been published in the papers already, although there is one name published which does not appear in our list. With regard to the Question put by my hon. Friend (Mr. Slagg), I may say that a telegram has been received from Mr. Cookson, to the effect that steps have been taken to look after the private effects of Messrs. Dobson and Richardson. With regard to the other Question—although I must apologize for interpolating an answer—as it has been asked I will answer it. A vessel from Port Said has been ordered to Alexandria for the reception of fugitives, and two other private ships have also been made available for persons who wished to go on board—providing, of course, they are persons whose means are such that they cannot reasonably be expected to pay for their passages. The first vessel was taken up by the Admiral to convey persons to Malta. I have no knowledge with regard to the other two ships. There appear to he about 300 British subjects in Alexandria who desire to quit at the present time. The total European population of Egypt is, of course, very large indeed. There are about 30,(00 Greeks, 15.000 French. 15,000 Italians, and 4,000 British (including Maltese), and 4,000 Austrian and German subjects.

I wish to ask the hon. Baronet whether it is true that we have been afraid to bury persons who were Europeans in the cemetery at Alexandria, and that Her Majesty's Ship Superb has been used as a hearse to take the bodies to sea?

Notice has been given that a Question like this will be put to-morrow, and I should prefer to answer then.

Are we to understand that the Papers relating to Dervish Pasha will be among the second batch of Papers that are promised?

The most important Papers are being hurried on, which relate to what has taken place up to the middle of May. The other Papers are being prepared as rapidly as possible, and it would be extremely inconvenient to lay a later Paper on the Table before an earlier one.

When are we likely to get any of these Papers?

I cannot give any promise; but the further Papers are being got ready as rapidly as possible. They are not yet in the condition of the first revise, but the second batch will be ready next week. The right hon. Gentleman must know that there never has been a case in which important Papers were brought out with such rapidity as in this case. ["Oh, oh!"] This is so, and it will be impossible, if you search the whole records of the Foreign Office, to find out Papers that have been presented with such rapidity.

Will these Papers refer to matters up to the 17th of April?

To the middle of May.

I should like to ask whether the rumour has reached the hon. Baronet that the Eastern Telegraph Company had been obliged to close its doors at Cairo?

May I also ask whether it is the intention of the Government, considering that these difficulties have arisen owing to the action of Her Majesty's Government, that those persons who can afford to pay for their passage are really to pay, or whether the Government do not intend to give a free passage to all, and also to victual them?

Up to the present Sir Edward Malet has not called upon British subjects to leave the country, nor have any other foreign Consuls called upon their fellow-subjects to do so.

I should like to ask whether it is true that the Khedive has called on the Sultan for 18,000 or any other number of Turkish troops? ["Order!"]

I think the opinion of the House is that that Question should not be answered without Notice.

Perhaps the hon. Baronet is now able to answer the Question of which I gave him Notice yesterday. It is, Whether Arabi Pasha was present at the conference which took place between Dervish Pasha and the Khedive; and, further, whether, in the Report which was made by the representatives of the Government in the first instance, it was not stated that Arabi was present?

On the same subject I would like to ask whether the hon. Gentleman would state whether the Vice Consul or any representative of Her Majesty's Government remains at Cairo—whether in that case Her Majesty's representative is in communication with Arabi, and whether he regards him as a traitor to his Sovereign, or a Minister of his Sovereign? [Cries of "Order!"]

I think it is right to point out that in Questions of a grave character such as these the hon. Baronet is entitled to ask that Notice should be given, and also, if he thinks proper, to decline to answer on public grounds. Having made this observation, I do not think it my duty to interpose as regards the Question which has just been put.

Sir,—

I rise to Order. I should like to observe that the hon. Baronet stated just before that he could not answer a Question which had been put from the Irish Benches because the feeling of the House seemed to be against an answer being given. As soon, however, as Questions were put from the Liberal and Conservative Benches, the hon. Baronet was ready enough to answer.

It is impossible that the hon. Member should know what I am about to say. I rose for the purpose of answering the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. J. Lowther), as his Question seemed to grow out of the the Question on the Paper. I was going to decline to reply to the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere), because his Question does not seem to grow out of the one on the Paper. As regards the right hon. Gentleman's Question, it would have been better if it had been on the Paper, so that an answer might have been given to it in the ordinary way. The meeting which took place between the European Consuls was a meeting between the Representatives of Germany, Austria, Italy, Russia, France, and England. There were present at that meeting the Khedive, Dervish Pasha, and the whole of his suite from Constantinople, and Arabi Pasha also. The object of that meeting was to receive an answer to a demand that had been made on Dervish Pasha by the Representatives of the Powers in regard to steps which should be satisfactory to the Great Powers to insure the safety of Europeans in Egypt. Dervish Pasha stated that Arabi had informed him that he would implicitly obey the orders given by the Khedive. The Khedive immediately issued orders for restoring the public tranquillity. These are the words to which I alluded yesterday—

"Dervish Pasha said that under the urgent circumstances of the case ho would assume joint responsibility with Arabi Pasha for the execution of the orders of the Khedive."

The European Consuls then said that the danger to the security of Europeans took precedence over all other questions for the moment, and that the political situation did not enter into the discussion. They also said to the Khedive and the Imperial Commissioners that they thought the discussion that had taken place with regard to the Europeans had nothing to do with the objects of Dervish Pasha's mission in Egypt. That meeting was on Monday.

Then why has the Khedive gone to Alexandria?

The hon. Baronet has not noticed my second Question—Whether in the Report made by the British representatives in Egypt to Her Majesty's Government, it was stated that Arabi Pasha was present at the meeting just described?

Yes, Sir, it was so stated. It is a detailed Report, but I have just given the substance to the House.

With reference to the measures taken for the preservation of peace in Alexandria, I wish to ask if any steps have been taken towards bringing to justice the Europeans who are reported to have commenced the disturbances by stabbing Arabs?

That Question does not seem to grow out of the one on the Paper, and I am unable to give the House any information on the subject, because I think any information I give should be of a well-founded character.

asked the Vice President of the Council, in reference to his statement that the present teachers of the Science Classes at "Hall of Science" were recognized by the late Government, when Mrs. Besant, Miss Alice, and Hypatia Bradlaugh became qualified to earn grants from public monies for sciences classes taught by them; whether they were returned to the Education Department in 1879 as teachers in classes in the Hall of Science; and, who was the Member of the late Government by whom their application was approved?

Sir, when the application was made in 1879 for the recognition of the science classes at the Hall of Science, the teachers returned were Dr. Aveling, Doctor of Science, London, and B.A. of Cambridge, with Annie Besant and E. Richardson as assistants. When my attention was first called to this matter by the hon. Member for Harwich (Sir Henry Tyler) Mrs. Besant and the Misses Bradlaugh were acting as assistants to Dr. Aveling. No change has taken place since that time except that the Misses Bradlaugh have passed the necessary examination for teachers, and have been recognized as such. In reply to the last Question of the hon. Member, my statement on Thursday last was that these classes "were admitted to grants by the late Government." What I wished to convey by that was that they were admitted to grants during the late Administration. I am quite prepared to assume the responsibility for the continuance of the grant, as well as for the recognition of the Misses Bradlaugh as qualified teachers. Under the conditions upon which grants are made, as laid down by the "Science Directory," no Administration would be justified in refusing to recognize these classes or their teachers.

The right hon. Gentleman is, no doubt, correct in one sense in stating that the late Government recognized these classes. As I was at that time at the Education Office, perhaps the House will allow me to state what had occurred. Certain rules are laid down as to the recognition of science classes; and if these provisions are complied with, as a matter of course the application is sanctioned. Application, I believe, was made in regard to these classes in the latter months of the last Administration. It was made by a committee, at the head of which was a clergyman of the Church of England, and as it seemed, no doubt, to the officer of the Department that the conditions had been complied with, the application was passed; but neither the Lord President, nor myself, nor any senior permanent official, was aware that any classes had been recognized in connection with the Hall of Science. I do not wish to censure the decision arrived at by the present Government; but what I want to say is this, that that decision was adopted on a full and complete knowledge of all the facts, in the ignorance of which a mere formal sanction was given by the late Government.

Sir, I have always understood that when anything is done in the Department under my control by my subordinate officers that I am responsible, and I wish distinctly to repeat that until 1881 I knew nothing about these grants until a Question was put to me by the hon. Member for Harwich. Those grants were made while the noble Lord the Member for Middlesex (Lord George Hamilton) was Vice President of the Council, occupying my position. They were continued for two years, and I find nothing to justify me in withdrawing those grants, and I take all responsibility for their continuance.

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether the Government is now prepared to carry out the long needed extension of the buildings of the National Gallery, in order to give sufficient space, not only for the works of art already in the possession of the Nation, but also for those which may be presented or bequeathed by private individuals; and, whether greater facilities in future will be afforded to the public to visit the National Collection by lighting the Galleries by Electricity on certain evenings in the week?

Sir, the Estimates for the current year contain no provision for making an addition to the buildings of the National Gallery. The very heavy expenditure for completing the Natural History Museum and the New Law Courts has prevented the Government from entertaining many other demands in respect of public buildings. With reference to the use of the electric light in the National Gallery, the responsibility rests wholly with the Trustees; but I think they would be wise in waiting the results of experiments in other public buildings, especially as regards their safety.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he will cause an independent, or effectually searching, inquiry to be made into the truth, or otherwise, of the numerous complaints against convict prison management which, for months past, have appeared in the "Civil Service Gazette" and other newspapers, and purporting to be written by the warders of those prisons; and, whether it is true, as recently stated in a letter in the "Times," signed "Assistant War- der," at Chatham, that assaults upon the warders "with the fist, stones, bricks, &c. are of almost daily occurrence?"

Sir, whenever any allegations are brought forward against the management of prisons I always take care that strict inquiry is made into them. For that purpose I have the valuable assistance of Visiting Committees and of the Visitors of the convict prisons, who are entirely independent of the Government. I am happy to say that the Prison Congress the other day gave an unanimous and favourable verdict in favour of the management of prisons. But the prison authorities have a responsible duty in maintaining discipline among the worst classes of society, and I cannot entertain or give credit to anonymous charges in newspapers made by convicts who do not give their names, or by warders who may or may not have been discharged, and who adduce no evidence of what they allege. In my opinion, if I did so I should seriously injure prison discipline, and give encouragement to insubordination.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, What steps are being taken to carry out the recommendation of Lord Kimberley's Commission on Penal Servitude as regards the abolition of Spike Island Convict Prison, and what is the cause of the delay in presenting the Report by the Committee on Convict Labour, appointed some months ago; and, how many times the Committee had met up to the present time?

Sir, as to Spike Island, I have not yet received an answer. The Report of the Committee is in draft, and it will be adopted before the end of the present month.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Sub-Commissioners under the Land Act, in making out their orders as to judicial rents, are in the habit of specifically defining the items in respect of which deductions for tenants' improvements are made from the rent, under Clause 8, sub-section 9, together with the amount so deducted; and, if he would have any objection to lay upon the Table of the House a specimen Copy of the order made out in such cases?

No, Sir; the Assistant Commissioners do not in their orders fixing fair rents specify the improvements in respect of which deductions from former rents are made, nor do they specify the amount deducted. Each order is accompanied by a Schedule of improvements, but the amount of money added to or deducted from the rent in respect of such improvements is not stated in the Schedule. There is no objection to laying a specimen copy of the order made in such cases on the Table; but it is already published in the Appendix to the Report of the Lords' Committee.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether Naval and Marine officers placed upon half-pay since March 1870 are liable to be called upon to serve?

Sir, I presume that the Question of the hon. Member refers to officers on retired pay, as all naval officers on half-pay are, of course, liable to servo; and officers of the Royal Marines placed temporarily on half-pay from ill-health, or on reduction of establishment, may also, at any time, be recalled to full pay if fit. With regard to naval officers who have been placed on the Retired List since 1870, it is laid down in Article 254 of the Queen's Regulations that they may be called into active service in case of war or emergency. There is no such definite provision regarding retired Marine officers; but it has never been doubted that, in such circumstances, all who are capable of serving Her Majesty would be ready to do so.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, under the scheme for creating a graduated surplus on the Irish Church Fund, showing £85,597 in 1882, and £24,288 in 1918, he proposes to consider the first of the sums, or the last, or what intermediate sum, a safe basis for the further loan to pay land arrears; whether that new loan is to be a sum on which the surplus from the Church Fund is to pay both the interest and a sinking fund; or, if it is to pay only the interest, leaving the repayment to begin after 1918, when £6,674,000 of present liabilities will be extinguished; and, whether, considering that it is only by postponing liabilities, and spreading over thirty-five years annuities and debts to the National Debt Commissioners intended to be paid much sooner, that any surplus at all can be shown or created, he would endeavour, by some extension of the period, to make the surplus sufficient to pay the whole liability under the Arrears Bill, so as to avoid throwing any part of the burden on the British taxpayer?

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he will state the financial arrangements he proposes to make in order to procure the sum of one million five hundred thousand pounds from the Irish Church Fund for the purposes of the Arrears of Bent (Ireland) Bill, seeing that the charges on the Church Fund under existing arrangements (including the repayment of debt) are in excess of the gross yearly income of the fund for many years to come, and that income is liable to serious reduction from the heavy arrears which are accumulating?

Sir, I suppose the first of these Questions is suggested by the Return lately laid on the Table, moved for by the junior Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Gibson). It has naturally been supposed that the Return gave information that I intended to lay before the House as the basis of the Arrears Bill, so far as the Church Surplus Fund is concerned; but that is not the case. The Return was moved for without the smallest reference to the Arrears Bill. We are preparing information that will be more relevant to the case; and I suggest that it would be more convenient, especially considering the difficulty of giving a clear answer on a subject of this kind, that we should wait for the further Return, which I hope will be in the hands of Members on Monday next.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the practical impossibility of obtaining an opportunity for discussing the restrictions imposed by Treasury Minute of the 21st December, 1881, upon Loans to Occupiers, under sec. 31, Land Act, 1881, he will consent to relax the most onerous of all, namely, that fixing £100 as the minimum sum to be lent?

Sir, I can only say at present that it is a very large and important matter that is involved in this Question; it is no less than this, whether the advances to be made by the Treasury in the cases of particular holdings shall assume the character partially of loans and partially of gifts. I do not wish now to express an opinion whether it ought or ought not to be done. In my opinion, it is much too important a subject to be treated as a mere matter of Executive detail. The question was carefully considered some months ago, when my noble Friend Lord Frederick Cavendish—now lost to the country—was Secretary to the Treasury, and the course that has been adopted is the only course we felt authorized to adopt. The subject is one which will be adverted to at a time when a statement is made to the House as to the course the Government advises on this and other points of importance.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If it is the fact, as stated in the press, that the late Mr. Walter Bourke had issued ejectments against such of his tenants (amongst others) as sought to get a fair rent fixed under the Land Act, and that he was about to evict them while their applications were pending; whether the Government have had brought to their knowledge the fact that many tenants who have applied to the Land Courts are meantime threatened with eviction, which must ensue before their cases are decided; and, if he intends to take any steps to protect the interests of such tenants until the Courts have decided upon their applications?

Sir, I need not say it was my duty to obtain information on these points from the Irish Government. I understand that the facts are that the agent of the gentleman unfortunately murdered last week, Mr. Bourke, evicted nine families, consisting of 68 persons, for non-payment of rent. All these tenants owed more than two years' rent, one of them nearly seven years' rent, and they refused altogether to pay. It is also stated that they were led to believe that the Land League would see after their rents, and provide them with huts. It is likewise stated that there were no special hardships in these cases. In Galway, Mr. Bourke issued ejectments against five tenants, of whom two subsequently appealed to the Land Court. It was on his return from attending the place where the tenants who appealed did not appear that he was shot. In Mayo ejectment decrees are pending against several tenants; but we have not sufficient information in respect to those decrees, nor have we, nor can we have, general information of the number of tenants who, having applied to the Land Courts, are threatened with eviction. Tenants so threatened can apply to the County Court of the district in which the execution is issued, for the purpose of having the execution stayed. I believe the provision of the law in that respect ought to be sufficient. With regard to the general question as to the stoppage of evictions, I have to repeat to the House that the only mode in which we can shorten the painful proceedings going on, and to some extent, of necessity, going on in Ireland, is by earnestly recommending and entreating the House to make progress and dispatch with the Bills we have now in hand. Every day adds, on the average, 20 to the number of evicted families, or 120 a-week, subject to deductions which I cannot exactly state, on account of those who may be replaced as caretakers. That is going on, and must go on, and we have not the power to check it, even if it were right we should, on which I do not give an opinion at present. I do think the House will feel, without distinction of sections or Parties, that this is a most powerful reason for our endeavouring to get forward with the legislation in hand, in order that the numerous persons who are in arrear and who are unable to pay their rents may have the opportunity of reaching a better and more secure position.

I wish to ask, Sir, whether the Irish Government can give any information as to the number of tenants whom Mr. Walter Bourke sold out in the county of Mayo before the passing of the Land Act, and so deprived of the legal value of their holdings or title to the protection of the Court. With reference to the appeal of the Prime Minister to expedite the passing of the—[Cries of "Order!"]

I have no information from the Irish Government on the subject of Mr. Bourke and his property, except that which I have given; but if the hon. Member will put down the particulars, or let me have them, I will take care to cause inquiry to be made.

The facts which have been stated as to the evictions going on and the manner of carrying them out, suggests a Question which I desire to address to the right hon. Gentleman—namely, Whether, as a number of new crimes are being invented by the Prevention of Crimes Bill, he could not include a clause making harsh and cruel evictions of the character which the Chief Secretary for Ireland described yesterday a crime punishable in the same way as "Boycotting?"

The hon. Member does not require to be told that the proper time for proposing a new clause is when the Bill is in Committee.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, with regard to his statement relating to Assab Bay, Her Majesty's Government have recommended the Government of Egypt to agree to the demand of Italy with regard to that harbour; and, what is the exact position of the negotiations on the subject of the Italian establishment at Assab, and of the projected Convention between the Italian and Egyptian Governments? The hon. Member further asked if the right hon. Gentleman was aware that a Bill was presented in the Roman Chamber by Signor Mancini, on the 12th of June, with reference to the Italian establishment in Assab Bay, which declared it to be an Italian colony, made it a free port, exempted the natives from taxation for 30 years, declared that their religion would be respected, and gave the Italian Government the right of making concessions of land and concluding treaties with neighbouring rulers; and, whether, under the circumstances, the right hon. Gentleman still adheres to his previous answer that there has been no recent cession of Assab Bay to the Italians?

Sir, the hon. Member has taken a most extraordinary course. He has asked the Prime Minister a long Question on foreign policy without giving any Notice of it. I must say that anything more remarkable I have never seen in all my experience.

The statement to which I referred has only just appeared; but as it was antecedent to the answer of the Prime Minister that no cession had been made of Assab Bay, or that, at all events, the Government were not cognizant of any cession, I thought I was in Order in pointing out a want of knowledge on the part of Her Majesty's Government.

The hon. Gentleman has given no reason whatever for not putting the Question on the Notice Paper. ["Order!"] He has not given any shadow of a reason. [Renewed cries of "Order!"] More extraordinary conduct—

I must appeal to you, Sir, whether the hon. Baronet is in Order in using such language?

If I understand the hon. Baronet correctly, he desires that the Question should be put on the Paper. If so, he is within his right.

I was alluding, not to the Question being put on the Paper, but to the censure which the hon. Baronet made.

I not only must maintain that censure, but I must increase it.

I must appeal to you, Sir.

I did not interfere with regard to the Question of the hon. Member for Greenwich, as I did not think it was out of Order; but in so far as he puts a Question which is not on the Paper, the hon. Baronet has a perfect right to complain of that part of the Question which was put without Notice.

My hon. Friend called your attention, Sir, not to the hon. Baronet declining to answer the Question, but to the terms of censure which he used.

I have said, Sir, that I have never known anything more extraordinary than the course taken by the hon. Member with regard to this Question; and I was going on to say, when I was interrupted, that I not only maintain the censure which I gave at first—[Loud cries of "Order!"and "Withdraw!"]

I am bound to say that if any hon. Member, in putting a Question, which he does entirely within his own right, is subject to censure, that censure should come from the Chair.

The censure, Sir—[Loud cries of "Withdraw!"] In consequence of repeated interruptions, I have never been allowed to finish my sentence. The course adopted by the hon. Member, to which I wish to call attention, began with the Question of which he gave public Notice to the Prime Minister about 10 days ago. The hon. Member wished to ask whether the Prime Minister was aware of the fact that Her Majesty's Government had recently ceded Assab Bay to Italy? These words were struck out at the Table, after public Notice was given; and I am very sorry the Question was so altered, because the Prime Minister would have been able to have made a most indignant reply to the Question in the form in which public Notice was given.

I rise to Order. I never stated anything of the sort.

I am not speaking of the Question which appeared on the Paper, but of the previous Question.

I have a copy of it here. I was perfectly cognizant of the fact that the British Government could not cede Assab Bay to Italy, as it did not belong to the British Government. The words of my Question were these—"And also in view of the recent cession of Assab Bay to Italy;" but not by Her Majesty's Government.

I was speaking, not of the terms of the Question as it was put on the Paper, but of the terms of the Question as it was originally given by the hon. Member, and as it was first printed.

I beg to repeat, Sir, that I never said anything of the sort.

I will place the Question as originally printed before the hon. Member. With regard to the Question on the Paper, I must ask the hon. Member to reserve his desire for further knowledge of the details until the Papers, which we are now bringing out rapidly, are laid upon the Table. I would remind the hon. Member that three weeks ago I answered the Question as it now stands on the Paper.

I beg to give Notice, Sir, that in consequence of the answer of the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I shall, on the earliest opportunity, draw the attention of the House to this subject, and move a Resolution. As I cannot allow these words to go uncontroverted, I may state that the Question which I put today is not in the least degree similar to the one which the hon. Baronet answered last week.

The Question to which I referred was asked by the hon. Member several weeks ago, and led to a discussion across the Table between my right hon. Friend on the Front Bench opposite (Mr. Bourke) and myself. My right hon. Friend said that the Italian flag was not flying at Assab Bay when the late Government left Office. I said it was flying there when the late Government left Office, and that was the case.

I will repeat my Question on Monday.

I never suggested that the late Government gave their sanction to the cession of Assab Bay—quite the reverse.

The present Government also have done nothing with regard to the cession of Assab Bay. They proposed an agreement between Turkey, Italy, and Egypt on the subject. That was declined. It fell to the ground, and nothing whatever was done.

Did not you recommend the Khedive to cede Assab Bay?

The Italians were already at Assab Bay at the time when the late Government went out of Office. We recommended that the position should be "regularized," and that there should be an agreement between the Porte, the Khedive, and the Italian Government on the subject. That agreement was declined. It never came to anything, and nothing whatever was done.

rose, amid cries of "Chair!"and "Order!" to make some further remarks, when—

The House will, perhaps, allow me to say that in Questions of this character Notice should be given.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If he will consider the expediency of suspending the Half-past Twelve Standing Order for the remainder of the Session, and thus give the Scotch Members an opportunity of forwarding measures interesting to that part of the United Kingdom, and not affecting England and Ireland, in those sixteen hours formerly appropriated to the business of the House, but of which it is deprived by the Standing Order in question?

said, he would like to ask, also, Whether there was any truth in the statement that it was proposed to send Scotch Business to a Committee of Scotch Members, so as to enable those Gentlemen to deal with it in the day-time instead of the dead of night, before the breakfast hour?

Sir, in answer to the Question of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, I am very sensible of the importance of the subject, and I do not wonder that he should put the Question just as if he were in despair; but I must own that to ask the Government to abolish the Half-past Twelve Rule at the present moment is only asking them to add another subject of discussion to the subjects we have already in hand—when the time at their disposal, and at the disposal of the House, is unfortunately very inadequate for its immediate purposes. With respect to the rumour inquired about by the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell), I should have thought, Sir, if there were any truth in its being intended to make a proposal of this kind, the proposal would have appeared in due course upon the Notice Paper of the House. All I have to say upon this subject at present is that the Government are very ready indeed to receive any suggestion that can be made of a practical character upon this Question, and that it is one to which, undoubtedly, they will give their own serious attention at the earliest moment when they can bring any results of their consideration into a practical form.

asked the Prime Minister whether he would consider the desirability of committing the Irish Coercion Bill to a general Committee of Irish Members?

No, Sir, I have no intention of doing that, and I think it would be irregular, under the circumstances; but I may observe, that if I did, the fact would appear that it is only a small minority of Irish Members who oppose the Bill.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in view of the serious depression of the silver trade, owing to the uncertainty prevailing in the minds of manufacturers and dealers respecting the duties upon gold and silver plate, and, seeing the various objections to the grant of a drawback upon existing stocks, and, seeing that no drawback has been allowed in the case of holders of duty-paid stocks of cotton and other European goods in India, who have had to sacrifice very largely under the recent Budget, Her Majesty's Government are prepared to adhere to their determination not to abolish the duties in the present Session of Parliament?

Sir, there is a good deal in the suggestion evidently meant to be conveyed by this Question; but I believe, as far as my knowledge and means of forming a judgment goes, that the mode indicated by the hon. Gentleman is the only mode out of the embarrassment attending this subject. But, considering the time of the year, and that nearly two months have elapsed since the financial plans of the Government were announced, I do not think anything but the prevalence of a general wish will justify Her Majesty's Government in making a proposal on the subject at the present time.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he is prepared to avail himself of the opportunity afforded by the sale of the Hamilton Palace Collection, to secure to the Nation some of the unrivalled works of art contained in it?

Sir, the subject is one to which the attention of the Trustees of the National Gallery has been carefully directed, as is known to me by their Correspondence with the Treasury, which will, I think, shortly reach its conclusion.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the large increase in the number of evictions in Ireland, he will take immediate steps to introduce a Bill temporarily to stop evictions, or will give special facilities for the discussion of the Bill of the honourable and gallant Member for Galway?

Sir, I may, perhaps, remind the hon. Member that to expedite our proceedings is the only manner in which we can possibly act in a beneficial way in this question. With that view, it is the intention of the Government, in consequence of the experience we have had, to ask the House to hold a Morning Sitting to-morrow, and on Fridays, during the present pressure of Business. When that is over we shall see how we stand. Moreover, it is my intention to move to-morrow—which I may as well mention publicly now—that the Arrears (Ireland) Bill do take precedence on all days when it is set down for discussion of all other Orders of the Day and Notices of Motion except the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Bill.

When that Motion is made, I shall ask the Government for some general account of what Business they intend to take besides that.

I beg to give Notice that, when the right hon. Gentleman makes that Motion, I shall ask the Government to give facilities for the discussion of the Agricultural Tenants' Compensation Bill this Session, as that measure is awaited with so much anxiety by great numbers of farmers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade a Question of which he had given him private Notice—namely, Whether, in an answer given on Monday last, he had not attributed to Lord Vernon language which had really been used by the President of the Royal Agricultural Society?

Sir, I have had the advantage of a conversation with Lord Vernon, and I am glad of an opportunity of correcting a mistake which seems to have caused Lord Vernon some little annoyance. It appears that the words which I quoted as having been spoken by Lord Vernon at a meeting of the Royal Agricultural Society were really spoken by the President, Mr. Dent. The mistake arose in this way. The Report from which I derived my information put these remarks down to the President, having previously spoken of Lord Vernon as Chairman, and hence my mistake. These remarks were to the effect that the introduction of lard or oleomargarine would enable dairy companies to work up their skim milk into a wholesome article of food; that the Council should be careful before writing to request the interference of the Board of Trade, as it was a question whether the public were not benefited by such forms of cheap and wholesome food. I am very glad to have the opinion of so eminent an authority as the President of the Royal Agricultural Society on this subject; and I may say that, from all the information I have been able to get, I am inclined to agree entirely with his view. These remarks were made by the President before Dr. Voelcker's Report, but after a statement by Dr. Voelcker, which his subsequent Report confirmed, that these cheeses were perfectly wholesome food. The letter from the Royal Agricultural Society was received on the 9th of June.

gave Notice that, on Monday next, he would ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, as he had stated that anarchy would not be allowed to continue in Egypt, he had seen the report of a speech made by the Italian Foreign Minister, to the effect that Italy would not consent to the armed intervention of certain Powers, and whether that referred to England and France?