asked the President of the Local Government Board, with reference to the steadily-increasing figures of pauperism in the Metropolis, Whether the present rate of increase is due to any special cause, or whether it is only an increase proportionate to the estimated increase in the population of the Metropolis?

In reply to the Question of my hon. Friend, I am glad to say that the increase in the pauperism of the Metropolis during the last few years does not exceed the proportionate increase in the population. On the contrary, it is rather loss than might have been expected from the growth of the population. The increase has practically been confined to the last three years; and if the statistics of London pauperism between 1871 and 1882 are examined, it will be found that there has been a very large diminution in the number of paupers. In the year 1871 the number was 153,293; while in 1882 it was 100,323, showing a diminution of 52,970, although the population had increased by upwards of 600,000 persons. This result is the more satisfactory because the reduction has taken place entirely among the outdoor paupers. Between 1871 and 1882 there has been an increase of 14,396 in the number of indoor paupers in the Metropolis; but the number of outdoor paupers has been reduced by no less than 67,306 persons.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he has received any representations from the Board of Public Works in Ireland as to the providing of additional inspectors, there being now only one for each province in charge of the loans to occupiers for land improvement; and, if not, whether he will call the attention of that Department to the inevitable delays and disappointment which must result from the want of a sufficient staff of inspectors?

No avoidable delay has yet occurred in dealing with applications for loans under Sections 19 and 31 of the Land Act; but the increased number of the applications now coming in will probably necessitate increased inspecting assistance; and the Treasury will have no hesitation in sanctioning this if satisfied of its necessity.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, having regard to the great and pressing need for arterial drainage in many parts of Ireland, the Government are prepared next (Session to amend the Drainage Act of 1864, by extending the definition of the term "a proprietor," and thus enable occupiers to form Drainage Boards, and otherwise avail themselves of the said Act?

This is a large and important subject requiring special consideration, which I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend it shall receive.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colo- nies, Whether he has yet received the Report of the Committee of Inquiry as to the case of the Cuban Refugees; and, if so, whether he will lay it upon the Table of the House?

Yes, Sir; the Report of the Committee of Inquiry was received yesterday morning at the Colonial Office; and it clearly condemns, as I anticipated, the conduct of the Local Authorities. I had hoped I should have been able to lay the Report and the Evidence on the Table to-day, together with the decision of the Secretary of State for the Colonies; but I cannot do so, because we have received a communication from the Governor of Gibraltar, Lord Napier, asking us to suspend our judgment until a letter is received from him, which is on its way, and which, I hope, may arrive to-morrow. The Papers and the decision of the Colonial Office will be laid simultaneously on the Table of the House.

What is the objection to laying the communication received from Gibraltar on the Table, without waiting for the decision of the Colonial Office? Why cannot we have it at once?

said, he did not think one moment would be gained by doing that. He hoped that to-morrow, or, at any rate, by Monday, all the Papers would be on the Table.

How are we to discuss this question before Parliament rises if we do not have the necessary Papers?

All I can say is that we have done the very best we can. We think the Papers ought not to be laid on the Table till the decision has been come to, and that decision cannot be given till to-morrow or Monday.

I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall move for these Papers.

May I ask who is the official directly responsible for the surrender of the prisoners?

Really, this is a most complicated case, and Papers will be laid upon the Table of the House, and it is too much that I should say who is chiefly responsible.

Am I right in interpreting the hon. Gentleman's answer as being to this effect— that the Government will not only see that the Papers are printed without delay, but that they will announce their decision in regard to the person responsible for this matter?

We have nothing to do with the printing establishments connected with the House. All we can do is to promise to lay the Papers on the Table as soon as they are ready. That we do, and I think they will be on the Table to-morrow or Monday.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Government have taken any steps to secure the release of the Cuban refugees by the Spanish Government; and, if so, what steps have been taken for that purpose; whether he will, at all events before Parliament is prorogued, lay all the Correspondence between the British and Spanish Governments upon the Table of the House; and, whether he will lay upon the Table of the House any communications which may have taken place from 1869 to 1871 between Her Majesty's Consuls in Cuba and the Governor of Rassam with any of Her Majesty's Secretaries of State, relative to the acts and proclamations of the Captain General of Cuba with respect to refugees or rebels escaping from Cuba?

As I have often stated, unofficial representations have been made to the Spanish Government. The Report received yesterday has been referred by the Colonial Office to the Law Officers of the Crown; and official representations cannot be made until we know their views. Correspondence will ultimately be laid on the Table, but cannot be laid while communications are passing. With regard to the last paragraph of the right hon. Member's Question, if he will inform me who the Governor of Rassam is, I shall be happy to give him an answer.

The hon. Baronet has not answered that portion of my Question which refers to Cuba.

The time has been rather short, and the Correspondence is long, and we have not succeeded in finding out anything yet. Mr. Dunlop was the Consul General, and further search will be made.

As many of us are of opinion that the right of asylum has been violated, and as no steps seem to have been taken to secure the release of the prisoners, I wish to ask whether we are to have no opportunity of discussing this question before Parliament rises?

That is a Question of which Notice should be given, and which should be addressed to the Prime Minister.

I will repeat it to-morrow.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the fact that Mr. Grey, Chief Court Valuer, acting for the Appeal Court, under the Land Act, at Lifford, county Donegal, valued a mountain holding on the Ogilvey Estate, held by a tenant named John Risborough, and consisting of twelve acres of bad land, at double the value set upon it by the two Valuers employed on behalf of the landlord; whether the Commissioners, or any of them, asserted that Mr. Grey included the value of houses on the holding, but, on the solicitor for the tenant demanding to have Mr. Grey's report examined, it was found that he had valued the land alone; and, whether Mr. Grey is the same official who valued farms on the estate of Lord Talbot de Malahide higher than the landlord's valuer; and, how long he will be continued as an Official Valuer of the Land Court?

The following is a copy of a telegram which I have received from the Land Commissioners in reference to this Question:—

"It is untrue that the Commissioners, or any of them, asserted that Mr. Grey included in his valuation the value of the house on the holding. The case still stands for judgment, and we decline any answer to the remainder of the Question."

asked, was he to understand that neither the right hon. Gentleman nor the Commissioners would give any reply with reference to a matter which was publicly stated in the Lifford Courthouse—namely, that Mr. Grey had valued the farm at double the sum fixed by the valuers of the landlord?

would like to ask when it would be convenient for the Chief Secretary to lay upon the Table the letter, extracts from which he read last night?

When I get leave from the Land Commissioners.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Mr. Fitzmaurice Hussey, J.P., Agent to Lord Dillon at Ballaghaderreen, has been in the habit of exacting a fee of one shilling from each tenant who came to him to take the affidavit at the foot of the application for the benefit of the Arrears Act; whether the taking of such a fee by a Justice of the Peace is illegal; and, whether the Lord Chancellor of Ireland will order the removal of Mr. Fitzmaurice Hussey from the Commission of the Peace?

I have received a Report from the Lord Chancellor in reference to this Question, stating that Mr. Hussey denies having ever taken a fee for taking an affidavit.

said, he would take the earliest opportunity of calling the attention of the House to the frauds that were being practised on the poor people of Ireland in the administration of the Land Act.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that the Inspector, who recently presented a favourable report with regard to the inhabit- ants of Tory Island, consulted neither the Catholic clergyman, nor any other person acquainted with the real condition of the people; if the Inspector went inside any of the houses on the Island; and, if so, how many; whether he has heard that two heads of families begged for relief from the priest, on the ground that neither they nor their children had tasted food on the very day of the Inspector's visit; and, whether, on the day following the visit, seven families begged to be sent away from the Island, before they were face to face with starvation?

The following extracts from the Inspector's Report will show the hon. Member that he has been misinformed:—

"The house of the Roman Catholic priest' the Rev. James O'Donnell, is near East Town, and from the deck of the gunboat, seeing him walking on the road near it, I sent a message by a boat that came out from the Island requesting him to come to West Town, near which was the only landing place where there was not heavy surf."

"The Rev. Mr. O'Donnell kindly accompanied me, and gave me such information as he possessed about the people and their ordinary sources of livelihood."

"I thought it my duty to tell Father O'Donnell, before leaving, that I did not think there was anything so exceptional in their case but what the Poor Law could meet in its ordinary administration."

asked, Was he to understand that the Inspector invited Father O'Donnell to come to East Town to him, and that the Inspector consequently did not visit the poor dwellings in East Town?

said, he would ask a further Question on the subject on Monday, and that he would also ask if the Chief Secretary had seen the comments of The Londonderry Journal, which circulated in Donegal, upon the destitution in that part of Ireland?

asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether his attention has been called to the alleged treatment of the remains of Chendria, the leader of the late Insurrection in the Rumpa District of the Madras Presidency; whether it is the fact that, in order to obtain proofs of the identity of the slain insurgent, Chendria's head was severed from his dead body, preserved in carbolic acid, and presented by the authorities to the dead man's relatives for identification; whether the widow of the dead man was forced in this manner to identify her husband's head for the satisfaction of the authorities; whether he is aware that widespread horror was caused among the Native community by these acts; and, whether he will inquire if the remains of the slain insurgent were restored to his family for burial according to Native rites?

Various matters connected with the insurrection in Rumpa have from time to time been before the Council and myself; but my attention has not been specially called to the circumstances attending the death of the outlaw Chendria, who was one of the chief leaders of the insurgents. It appears, however, from records in the India Office that on February 12, 1880, Chendria was killed by one Jumpa Pandiah, who had been his partizan and lieutenant; that his head—which seems to have been cut off by his own people—was brought to Rajahmundry, to Colonel Buck, who was in command of the operations against the rebels, and that it was recognized by Chendria's brother, his mother, and a gaol warder who had had charge of him for six months. It also appears that the Madras Government telegraphed orders to Colonel Buck to keep the head as long as practicable for identification. On the other points referred to in the Question of the hon. Member I have no information. Chendria's death occurred nearly three years ago, at a time when the Madras Government were contending with a very serious insurrection; and I do not consider it necessary to institute any inquiries into the matter at this date.

asked, Whether the noble Marquess would inquire whether the remains of Chendria had yet been interred? It would seem not, as instructions had been given to preserve the head as long as possible for identification. He gave Notice that he would ask a further Question on the subject next Session.

asked the Secretary of State for India, What steps have been taken to reduce the mortality in the Bengal Gaols, since the last Report showed that, though less than in the exceptional year of 1879, it was still immensely higher than among the free population of all conditions?

Since I presented certain Papers in July last the only additional information which has been received on the subject referred to in the Question is contained in a recent despatch from the Government of India. It is there stated that, in consequence of my despatch of the 25th of May—which is among the Papers presented—a Circular has been addressed to the various local governments with a view to insure greater vigilance in the matter of mortality. The Government of India consider that the diet scales now in force are sufficient to keep the prisoners in good health; but they have their attention still specially directed to the subject. They remark—and no doubt with reason—that the returns of deaths among the free population cannot be relied upon in the same sense as those of the deaths in gaol, where every case is strictly recorded; but the Government of India promise to send home annually a general review of gaol statistics, which will be carefully scrutinized.

asked whether the noble Marquess would direct inquiries to be made as to the effect, not only of the dietary scale, but also of the absence of ventilation and the overcrowding upon the health of the prisoners confined in those gaols? And also, whether he would take steps to ascertain whether it was true that the prisoners had to lie upon mounds of earth instead of upon beds; and whether these mounds of earth, having been used by generations of prisoners, were not often soaked with disease?

The subject to which the hon. Member refers is now under the consideration of the Government of India, and they are now making the inquiries which the hon. Member desires should be made.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, If Her Majesty's Government will be prepared next Session to introduce some measure for giving pensions to the widows of Seamen and Marines?

Yes, Sir; it is our intention next Session to deal with the question of pensions to the widows of seamen and Marines killed in the Service.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether the ladies who accompanied General Maceo to Gibraltar were surrendered, at the same time as himself, to the Spanish authorities?

was understood to say that, according to the information which had been received, these ladies were conveyed in carriages with General Maceo across the British lines.

asked whether the ladies did not land with General Maceo at Gibraltar; and whe- ther they were not taken in the same carriage with him when he was conveyed by the police beyond the British lines? He also wished to know whether the ladies had accompanied him willingly?

said, that he did not know whether they went willingly or unwillingly. All that was known was that, when General Maceo was taken beyond the British lines, these ladies were also carried beyond the British lines.

By the police?

Yes.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the ladies who accompanied General Maceo, when surrendered to the Spanish authorities by the authorities at Gibraltar, have been imprisoned?

We have no reason to believe that these ladies have been imprisoned by the Spanish authorities.

asked whether any inquiry had been made on the subject?

If the hon. Gentleman will inform me that he has any reason to believe that these ladies are imprisoned, inquiries shall be made; but we believe that they are not imprisoned.

said, that the information in the American papers, and that which he had received, was to the effect that they were imprisoned. He should like inquiries to be made on the subject.

If the hon. Gentleman will show me the papers, I will cause inquiries to be made.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, If he will state whether the Royal Marines are at present above or below the numbers voted by Parliament, and if it is intended to propose an increase of that force in the next Session, and the re-establishment of the Woolwich Division?

In answer to the first Question of the right hon. and gallant Admiral, I have to say that on the 25th of this month the Royal Marines were 16 under the, establishment. I must defer to next Session any statement in reply to the other two Questions.

In rising to put the following Question, I wish to say that, having given two or three days' Notice of this Question, I should wish to have a definite statement from the Chief Secretary as to the intentions of the Irish Government in reference to this subject. I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to a speech reported in the "Standard" newspaper of 27th November, as having been delivered by Michael Davitt at Navan on the previous day, to the following effect:—

"As to the calamity staring some of the people of the West in the face, he would not mince language as to the cause of these periodical famines; but neither he nor Mr. Parnell would ever again beg for a starving Ireland. They would compel landlordism to provide for the starving people during the coming winter. Unless just and wise legislation ere long prevented its necessity, the time would come when the starving people of Donegal, Connemara, Kerry, and Cork would have to be told to march down on the plains, and seize the land upon which to live as civilized beings in a Christian country. If the tenant farmers of the West would pay the rent that should go to feed their children, then let them die, and Ireland and humanity would be well rid of such a coward race. In case they should not succeed in getting the Government to do its necessary duty, he proposed that they should make Irish landlordism support the people. He proposed, in ease Mr. Gladstone did not apply the surplus of the Arrears Estimate to save the people, that no rent should be paid from this November until next May, and that out of this sum a portion should be placed in a National Relief Fund, by which to save the people from starvation;"

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, I would, by permission, ask him this Question—Whether his Predecessor in Office, and every person acquainted with the condition of Ireland, had not expressed the same opinion as that attributed to Mr. Davitt, that Ireland suffers from congestion of population in certain districts; whether it is not in those districts—Donegal, Connemara, Kerry, and Cork—that famine is apprehended in the coming winter; and, whether a re-distribution of the population over the rich grazing plains has not been advocated by several English statesmen; and, whether, in reference to that portion of the Question which charges Mr. Davitt with stirring up the people to outrage, it is not the fact that he has invariably warned the people of Ireland against the commission of crime?

I would ask the Chief Secretary on the same subject, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that the principle advocated by Mr. M. Davitt—namely, a reduction of rent during seasons of extreme distress—has been recognized in the agrarian legislation of India?

There is only one of these supplementary Questions that I need answer. I am quite aware that the seat of something like chronic distress in Ireland is in over-populated districts, which the Government hope to begin to relieve by emigration. It is possible that English statesmen may have recommended a transfer from these districts to the rich grazing lands of Ireland; but they did not recommend that that transfer should be made by illegal means. The Government had a shorthand writer present during Mr. Davitt's speech, and his report is substantially in accord with the report in The Freeman's Journal. In reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford, the Government have directed their earnest attention, and have been directing their earnest attention since or probably before the day on which the first Question was asked on this subject. And I may say that questions relating to the treatment of speeches made on public platforms are absolutely the most difficult, and those which require the most consideration, both on grounds of policy and on grounds of law, of any questions which can be laid before the Government. I will, therefore, take this opportunity of saying that the Government have directed their earnest attention to the speeches of Mr. Davitt, of the hon. Member for Wexford, and of Mr. William Redmond, as to whom a Question was asked by an hon. and gallant Member opposite (Sir Henry Fletcher) a few days ago. Their conclusion is, that if such speeches continue to be made, there is no hope for peace and order in Ireland. It is impossible to keep crime in check by any system of punishment as long as speeches like these are made, which, from whatever their intention—and I say nothing about that—experience tells lead to crime and outrage. If the speeches made at public meetings of the National Land League are continued in the same strain as those made during the last week, I shall feel it my duty to recommend the Lord Lieutenant to exercise his power, under the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, to prohibit these meetings. The Government have been advised that Mr. William Redmond's speech comes within the 7th section of the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, and a prosecution will be forthwith instituted. With reference to Mr. Davitt's speech, and the first portion of the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford, which have been referred to in the Question of the right hon. Baronet, the Government are advised that they are not within the scope of the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act. Neither are they indictable. But I am advised that the latter part of the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford, referred to in the Question, is open to a prosecution for sedition; but I am recommended by the Attorney General for Ireland not to prosecute. It is quite out of the question, however, that such speeches should be allowed, and application will be made that these speakers shall be bound to be of good behaviour, or committed to prison in default.

Has the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who allowed Mr. Michael Davitt to go at large, been called to this speech?

The attention of the Irish Government has been called to this Question, and their opinion is that Mr. Michael Davitt should be treated exactly as if he were any other person.

Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to inform the House whether Her Majesty's Government is in possession of an official shorthand writer's note of the speech made by Mr. William Redmond at Cork?

A Government reporter was present.

I wish to ask the same Question in reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford.

I telegraphed to Ireland early to-day on that point, and it is the only point in connection with this matter on which I have not received an answer.

I did not ask the right hon. Gentleman whether a shorthand writer was present when the speech of Mr. Redmond was made in Cork, but whether the Government was in possession of a full official report of the speech?

That will be a matter which will come before a legal tribunal. I can only say that the Government reporter was present.

Perhaps it is desirable I should say that I was not aware, when coming here this evening, that this Question was to be asked; that, therefore, I am not here in consequence of it, and that I will be back again in Dublin to-morrow.

I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the Chief Secretary if the Irish Executive secured the services of an official shorthand writer at the public meeting held on Sunday last, at St. Mullins, County Carlow; if they are now in possession of a full official shorthand note of the speech delivered on that occasion by my hon. Friend the Member for Wexford; and as it appeared by the consultation which took place between the Chief Secretary and the Attorney General for Ireland that neither of them knows of the existence of such a note, and therefore could not have acted upon it, I beg to ask him upon what evidence he arrived at the decision, with respect to my hon. Friend, which he has communicated to the House?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that a sum of £2,000 has been applied by the Board of Works, under sanction of the Treasury, to the construction of a deep water jetty at Clare Castle, and that the quay when nearly completed collapsed; and, if it is a fact that efforts are now being made to prop it up by means of wooden piles driven down in front, which must leave it always a source of danger to vessels moored alongside; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government will instruct the Board of Works to reconstruct the jetty upon a solid foundation?

The statement that the new quay at Clare Castle has collapsed is not correct. But I learn that the wall has moved to the extent of 14 inches at one point; and the Board of Works are about to submit to the Treasury a proposition for permanently remedying this. The wooden piles which the hon. Member thinks are meant for props are really the ordinary fenders, protecting ships from injury by contact with the stone work.

asked the Lord Advocate, Whether, as a decision of the English Court of Appeal has declared Police buildings not liable for Property Tax, Her Majesty's Government propose to relieve Police buildings in Scotland in a similar manner?

I presume that my hon. Friend refers to the case of Coombor against the Justices of Berkshire, decided by the Queen's Bench Division in March last. The judgment was appealed against, and the case is expected to be heard before the Court of Appeal almost immediately. In the case of "Clark v. the Dumfries Commissioners of Supply," the Court of Session, in July, 1880, held that property tax was payable in respect of police stations. Until it is seen whether the judgment of the Queen's Bench Division in Coomber's case is affirmed or reversed, it would be premature for the Government to consider whether they should take any steps in the matter referred to in the Question.

asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether it is true that the 1st Manchester, 63rd Regiment, and the 1st Battalion of Seaforth Highlanders, lately serving in Egypt, remained on the India Establishment until October 10th; and, whe- ther from time of landing up to that date they received Indian or English pay and allowances?

The 1st Manchester and 1st Seaforth Highlanders remained on the Indian Establishment until relieved on it by the 2nd Derbyshire and 2nd Manchester on, I believe, the 14th and 15th of October respectively. From the date of their landing in Egypt up to those dates, they, as I stated last Monday, came on the same scale of pay and allowances as the rest of the British troops with the Expeditionary Force.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that, in consequence of the powers conferred on the Irish magistracy by the Prevention of Crimes Act, Messrs. Thomas Killeen and Patrick Killeen, of Ballyglass, county Mayo, two blind musicians, are prevented from following their occupation as teachers of a school for music and dancing; if he will state under what section of the Act these two persons are thus deprived of their only means of gaining a livelihood; and, if he will lay upon the Table a Copy of the Correspondence which has passed between the Lord Lieutenant and the Messrs. Killeen on this subject?

The poor men alluded to in this Question had already brought their case before the Lord Lieutenant, and inquiry had been made into it. The Constabulary reported, in reference to them, that they were men of quiet, honest character, who supported themselves mainly by playing music at dances through the country, and teaching dancing. Most of the dances at which they played were held at night; and they now fear that the provisions of the Prevention of Crime Act will prevent many of their patrons from being out at night and attending their classes. The intention of the Act is only to interfere with people who are out at night for a bad purpose; and if, as I have reason to believe, the dancing parties of these men do not come within the provision, they will not be interfered with.

Am I to understand from the right hon. Gentleman that there is no charge alleged against these musicians, and that, nevertheless, the local magistrates prohibit them from pursuing their avocation?

As far as I can gather, they express apprehension that their business of attending dances at night might be interfered with by the Prevention of Crime Act, because they think that it might discourage dances at night. As far as I can gather, there will be no direct interference with them.

The right hon. Gentleman has not stated whether the Correspondence which has taken place in this case will be laid on the Table. From the papers which have been sent to me, and which are stated to be copies of this Correspondence, it is plain that these musicians, against whom no charge whatever was brought, were distinctly prohibited from pursuing their avocations. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether they are at liberty now to resume their occupations?

Most certainly they are. My reading of the Report is that they are perfectly at liberty. As regards the Correspondence, if it can be called such, I will look at it again, and if there is anything in it I will lay it on the Table.

Could the right hon. Gentleman state under what clause of the Prevention of Crime Act dancing is forbidden in Ireland? I would also ask—and perhaps the Prime Minister would answer—whether it is only among the upper classes that dancing is permitted in Ireland?

asked the Secretary of State for War, If he can state when the remaining portion of the First Class Army Reserve now serving with the Colours are likely to be demobilized?

It is hoped that a further demobilization of the Army Reserve may be carried out shortly; and the War Office is now in communication with Sir Archibald Alison, as the General Commanding in Egypt, on the subject.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he can now state the result of the inquiry ordered into the shooting case at Baltinglass, county Wicklow; by whom was the inquiry held, and was it open to the public?

Mr. M'Leod, the Resident Magistrate of the district, went over specially to Baltinglass, and made inquiries respecting the state of the town from several respectable persons living in it—from the clergymen, Protestant and Roman Catholic, from the bankers, and from some shopkeepers, and they all testified that within the last two months there has been a perceptible improvement in its state; and, under these circumstances, it was considered that no good, but possibly mischief, might arise from re-opening Mr. Asher's case.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is the fact that Mr. M'Leod, R.M., has on several occasions recently used language from the Bench calculated to excite and exasperate the people of the county Wicklow, which has been so remarkable hitherto for its peaceful character; whether, on a recent occasion at Baltinglass, in a case in which Mr. George O'Toole summoned Patrick Doyle for intimidation, by using violent and disgraceful language, and threatening to stone him, Mr. M'Leod allowed the defendant's attorney to call Mr. O'Toole "a big-headed ass" and "a brute" with impunity, and without a word of condemnation; and, whether the Government will censure such conduct?

With regard to the first paragraph of this Question, Mr. M'Leod informs me that he has not at any time, from any branch of Petty Sessions, used language calculated to excite or exasperate the people of the county Wicklow. He has found it necessary to condemn strongly the system of "Boycotting," which, though recently modified, had become a nuisance in the village of Baltinglass; but his remarks could only have given offence to persons engaged in this pernicious practice. In reply to the second paragraph of the Question, Mr. M'Leod states that he has no recollection of hearing the defendant's attorney in the case referred to call Mr. O'Toole "a big headed ass." The attorney did call Mr. O'Toole "a curly-headed fellow," and was at once strongly rebuked by Mr. M'Leod, who also found it necessary to rebuke Mr. O'Toole for calling the attorney "a brute."

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he is aware that the marauding Transvaal Boers, who, assisted by deserters from the British Army, have for some time past invaded the territories of Mankaroane and other Bechuana Chiefs, have now established a quasi authority in South Bechuana Land, which is amenable to no civilized Government; whether he has received information that these Boers have recently made demands on Mankaroane for the cession to them of a large part of his territory; and, what steps, if any, are being taken, by either Her Majesty's Government or by the authorities of the Cape Colony, to restrain these elements of disorder on the British frontier?

asked the hon. Gentleman, Whether the Government has been informed that a considerable number of deserters from Her Majesty's Army have assembled in Bechuana Land, and are acting with the Transvaal Boers in their hostile movements; and, if so, whether any steps have been taken to bring these offenders to justice, and to protect the Native Chiefs in their exercise of their territorial rights?

The Papers which I laid on the Table of the House nearly 10 days ago, and which I had hoped would have been before this in the hands of Members, will give the latest information which the Colonial Office has received. We have no information as to the establishment of a new authority in Bechuana Land; and the demands made on Mankaroane for cession of territory have nominally up to this time only been cession to the Natives warring against him. I have already informed the House on two occasions of the proposals which Her Majesty's Government made for a joint mounted force of Transvaal, Orange Free State, and Cape police, to capture these marauders and adventurers, which have at present fallen through, owing to the Orange Free State and the Transvaal having refused to join, and Her Majesty's Government is not prepared to go beyond these proposals.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been drawn to the evidence given before the Committee on Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings, 1881–2, as to want of sanitary regulations with regard to the erection of such dwellings in the Metropolis outside the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Board; and, whether he will consider the advisability of giving further statutory powers to the local authorities?

I have referred to the evidence upon which the Artizans' Committee based the recommendations that many of the sanitary provisions of the Metropolitan Building Act should be extended to the suburbs, and I presume it is to this evidence that the right hon. Gentleman alludes. If so, I may point out that under the Public Health Act, 1875, all urban sanitary authorities are empowered to make bye-laws prescribing sanitary regulations with regard to the erection of dwellings, and any rural sanitary authority can have this power conferred on them. In this way sanitary authorities in the suburbs can make provisions in some respects even more stringent than those contained in the Metropolitan Building Acts; and in many cases not only have the sanitary authorities made bye-laws, but they have shown commendable zeal in enforcing them. I am not prepared to say, therefore, that it is necessary to give further powers to sanitary authorities on this subject; but I will consider the matter during the Recess.

said, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would draw the attention of the local autho- rities to the powers they possessed. There could be no doubt that wretched buildings were being put up.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, as one of "the trustees to aid the Sea and Coast Fisheries of Ireland," If it be a fact that out of a capital of about £35,000, the greater portion of which is lying idle, the trustees made loans to fishermen to the amount of only £2,244 for the year 1881, although they received in repayment for loans during the same period £3,392; if the expenses of management, including law costs, & c, amounted for 1881 to the sum of £748; and, if he will take the necessary steps to relieve the trustees of the management of this charitable fund, and to place it, as they requested some time ago, under the control of the Inspectors of Fisheries as an addition to the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund?

The hon. Member states the transactions of the Trustees to Aid the Sea and Coast Fisheries of Ireland as regards loans and repayments in the year 1881 quite correctly. The expense of management in that year was £330; but that sum does not include law costs. I have not the Report for the year by me, and I cannot say what they amounted to. I have had the suggestion contained in the final paragraph of the Question under consideration, and am in communication with the Trustees and the Treasury on the subject; but the matter has not yet arrived at such a stage as will permit me to make any statement in regard to it just now.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that, at an inquiry held before Charles H. Teeling, esquire, in Cavan, on 13th instant, into the claim of William Trimble, Killaghduff, in barony of Tullyhaw, for compensation under the Crimes Act, Sub-Inspector Pearson, of Manlinton, applied to have such compensation levied on parish of Kinawley, and a few townlands in the parish of Temple port adjoining, and that Mr. Pearson then applied to have every Protestant in the parish of Kinawley exempted, although they had not applied for exemption on their own behalf; whether the only Catholics recommended for exemption were two priests and one layman; and, whether, under the above circumstances, he will remove Mr. Pearson to another district?

At the inquiry in question the Sub-Inspector recommended the compensation should be levied off the parish and townlands stated, and when asked by the investigator whether he thought any persons should be exempted, gave the names of those whom he considered should be so exempted, being in several of the cases ignorant of the religious persuasions of the persons; but, whatever the Sub-Inspector may have recommended at the inquiry, the charge on the district and all the details respecting it are determined by the Lord Lieutenant. I see no reason why Mr. Pearson should be removed to another district.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that, on the property of F. O'Beirne, esquire, a minor, in county Leitrim, the tenants entered their cases to fix judicial rents in January last and their cases have not yet been heard; if the above facts are correct, whether he can account for the delay; whether he is aware that the tenants have been already served with writs for the rent due on the 1st instant, although they remitted the amount on the 14th instant, and the rents are double the Government valuation; and, if these facts are correct, whether or not the tenants are entitled to any redress?

I have frequently explained to the House, in answer to similar Questions, that cases are listed for hearing in the order of their receipt in the office of the Land Commission, and that any delay in hearing any particular case arises from the fact that a number of cases having priority have first to be disposed of. No information has reached the Land Commissioners of writs having been served on the tenants referred to in the Question. The Government valuation in the cases is £164 15s., and the rents £293 1s. 6d.

asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether, in the case of The Queen v Parker and Eakins, for entering houses at night and demanding arms and money, informations were taken by Mr. Harrington, J.P., and returned by him for trial at the Murroe Petty Sessions; whether this gentleman declined to accept bail for so serious a charge, but committed the accused to gaol; whether the same magistrate was Chairman of the Bench of five magistrates which subsequently investigated and dismissed the charge; if he will state under what Statute a Petty Sessions Court is under an obligation to return informations for trials when satisfied that there is no case to go to a jury; if he will further state in what capacity Messrs. Lyster and Bourke sat at Murroe on the rehearing of the case; and, whether it is true that Mr. Lyster stated he was sent there by the order of the Lord Lieutenant, and would send the case on for trial on his own responsibility, even against the majority of the other magistrates?

Sir, there are six Questions in this Question of the hon. Member, and the answers are:—To the first—Informations were not taken and returned for trial at Petty Sessions, nor could they be; to the second—bail for the appearance of the accused at Petty Sessions was, I believe, refused; to the third—no charge was dismissed; an application for informations was refused by a majority of the Bench; to the fourth—no Statute that I am aware of; to the fifth—as Justices of the Peace; and to the sixth—this statement was not made. I am informed that the Resident Magistrates stated that if a case was established in their opinion to go before a jury, they would, on their own responsibility, return the accused for trial; and the local magistrates stated that they did not contemplate taking any part in the proceedings in the case.

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Who is responsible for the arrangements in connection with the forthcoming opening of the Royal Courts of Justice, under which standing room to view the ceremonial within the building is provided for only two hundred members of the Junior Bar, while all other members of the profession, except Queen's Counsel and Benchers of the Inns of Court, are relegated to an open air stand in the outer quadrangle, along with bricklayers' labourers and other workmen who have been employed in the erection of the building; and, whether there is not yet time to amend this arrangement and provide more adequate and befitting accommodation for the many hundred barristers who will thus be practically shut out from even witnessing a pageant so full of historical interest to all members of the profession?

The hon. Member has very much understated the accommodation I have been able to provide for the Junior Bar and for other persons. There are 1,700 places in the Central Hall at my disposal. I have appropriated 900 to the various branches of the Legal Profession, to the Judges, Queen's Counsel, officers of the Court, the Junior Bar, and also to the members of the Incorporated Law Society. I have also been able to erect galleries in the quadrangle, in which there will be accommodation for 700 persons. A considerable number of places will be provided in rooms overlooking the quadrangle. I have been in communication on the subject with the Treasurers of the Inns of Court; and I find they have not taken any exception to the arrangement that workmen who have been engaged on the building are to be admitted into the Courts to witness the ceremony. I have erected a gallery where 450 of them will be able to see the proceedings, and I may add that Her Majesty has consented to receive an address from them.

asked whether it was true that tickets had been supplied to the jury in the case of "Belt v. Lawes," giving them accommodation in the quadrangle; and, if so, by what influence were they obtained, and on what principle were they bestowed?

asked whether it was not the right hon. Gentleman's opinion that the bricklayers and labourers who had been engaged in the building of the Law Courts were as much entitled to tickets as members of the Junior Bar?

I thought I had intimated my concurrence with the hon. Member in the answer already given. I think that these men, having been engaged in the building of the Courts, are as much entitled as members of the Junior Bar. With regard to the other Question, it is quite true that Mr. Justice Huddleston wrote to me asking for tickets for the jury in the Belt case, and I have sent him 12 tickets for the stand in the quadrangle.

Why?

asked the Judge Advocate General, Whether it is a fact that, under the "Capitulations," it is impossible for our Military Authorities in Egypt to prevent the sale of drink to our soldiers by Greeks and Italians, &c., and that the result is seen in such outrages as the attack on the Arab who was lately killed by drunken soldiers; and, whether he will consider the advisability of placing our Troops, while in Egypt, under the Mahomedan Law, so far as it prevents their being supplied with intoxicating drink?

I am not quite sure that I understand what is meant by the "Capitulations" referred to in this Question; but I may state generally that it is impossible for our military authorities in Egypt to prevent the sale of drink by Greeks and Italians, though, no doubt, they may, by placing certain localities out of bounds, or by similar regulations, prevent within certain limits the purchase of drink by soldiers. As to the second Question, I am afraid my hon. Friend must be labouring under some confusion of ideas. I do not know whether he thinks that because the Mahomedan law is a military law therefore all military law must be Mahomedan law; but I certainly have no power to place our troops while serving in Egypt under the Mahomedan Liquor Law—whatever that may be—or under any other Mahomedan laws or usages. I hope I may be permitted to add that I trust the outrage referred to —of which I know nothing except what I have seen in the papers—will not be taken as a fair specimen of the conduct of our troops in Egypt, which, to judge by the courts martial which have come before me, has been exceptionally good.

asked if it was true that the Egyptian authorities at Ramleh had informed a British Colonel that they would not convey soldiers returning from Ramleh if they were in a state of drink?

said, he knew nothing whatever about it.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether Her Majesty's Government have received the despatch from Sir H. Bulwer, in which he submits his proposals with reference to the mode and time of the re-instatement of Cetewayo as ruler of Zululand; and, if so, will he lay a Copy of it upon the Table of the House?

The Government have received the despatch from Sir Henry Bulwer. It has been carefully considered, and detailed instructions have been telegraphed to Natal directing Sir Henry Bulwer to proceed without delay to make the necessary arrangements and prepare for the speedy return of Cetewayo to Zululand. The Papers cannot be laid on the Table until Sir Henry Bulwer has made the proper announcements on the spot, as it would be most inconvenient that their contents should be known here before Sir Henry Bulwer has been able to communicate them to those more immediately concerned.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether any report, the contents of which can be communicated to the House, has been received from the Naval authorities at Portsmouth relative to the state of the depot ship at that port; if not, whether a report on the subject will be called for, and the result laid upon the Table?

No, Sir; nothing is known at the Admiralty of a special Report as indicated by the hon. Member's Question; and it is not thought necessary to call for one.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he has received from the Metropolitan Board of Works the Report of Captain Shaw upon the Theatres and other places of public entertainment; and, if so, whether he will lay them upon the Table of the House?

, in reply, said, that the Bo-port in question had been received by the Home Secretary, and was now under consideration. It was not deemed expedient to lay it upon the Table.

asked whether they were to understand that if laid on the Table it would alarm the public; and if it was justifiable to allow the public to remain in ignorance of its contents?

said, he was not able to state the reasons why his right hon. and learned Friend declined to lay it on the Table of the House.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether, with a view to make service on board Her Majesty's ships more popular amongst officers of the Royal Marines, and to increase their opportunities for practice in the administration of Military Law, as well as improve their position when serving with officers of the Royal Navy afloat and ashore, he will give them the same rights under the Naval as they possess when serving under the Army Discipline Act?

Sir, the subject to which the hon. Member's Question refers is a complicated one; and it would be impossible for me, within the limits of an answer to a Question, to state the views of the Admiralty upon it. The matter is under consideration, and I must reserve my answer until I make my annual Statement.

asked if he was to understand that the Government did not intend to put an end to the inequality that existed between the Marines and the Navy?

could only say that at present he wished to avoid expressing any opinion on the part of the Admiralty on the subject.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the Prisons Board (Ireland) ever received any paper or report or pamphlet on the Irish Prisons Penal Labour System, written by the Governor of Mount joy Convict Prison; and, if so, if he will have any objection to lay a Copy of same upon the Table?

On the 15th of January last the Governor of Mount joy Prison submitted to the Prisons Board in manuscript some remarks on the utilization of convict labour with a request that he might communicate them to a periodical. The reply conveyed to him by the Board was that they did not approve their officers contributing to the Press. On January 26 he re-submitted the document, with a request that it might be forwarded to the Chief Secretary—I was not Chief Secretary at the time, and have not seen it—and it appears that in October last each member of the Prisons Board received a printed copy of what they believed to be the same matter, headed "For private circulation only." I do not think this is a kind of document which ought to be laid upon the Table.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Queen's Institute (Dublin) is chartered; and, if so, in whom are the powers of the charter vested?

I have ascertained that there is no record of any Charter to the Queen's Institute in the Hanaper Office or Record and Writ Office in Ireland; it would, therefore, appear that the Institute is not chartered.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether officers of the civilian branch of the Navy ranking with Lieutenants, although not entitled to half pay, are, for this reason, liable to removal from Her Majesty's Service when, in the case of a Lieutenant, such removal would be inapplicable?

There is no difference in regard to the powers of the Admiralty over them between a Lieutenant entitled to half-pay and an officer of the civilian branch of the Navy ranking with a Lieutenant, but not entitled to half-pay. Both are equally liable to have their names removed from the list of the Navy by order of the Board of Admiralty, and independently of court martial.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been directed to the observations of Mr. Justice Hawkins in a case of The Queen against John Dillon, tried at the Central Criminal Court on Tuesday last; and, if he has taken, or will take, measures to give effect to the views of the Judge as to the prosecution of persons charged with robbery accompanied by violence and other serious outrages through the instrumentality of the Public Prosecutor?

The attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department has been drawn to the matter; and my right hon. and learned Friend is now considering what effect he can give, if any, to the expressions of the Judge.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, When the men willing to join batteries of Royal Naval Artillery Volunteers in Deal, Dover, and Folkestone, to be attached to the London brigade, may expect a definite answer to their application made in October 1881; and, do the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty contemplate accepting their services?

The subject referred to by the hon. and gallant Member is still under consideration. The course to be taken as to Naval Volunteers will be stated when the Estimates are introduced, and we cannot deal separately with individual offers of service.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, To explain the progress made with the harbour works of Colombo, including the breakwaters; the amounts expended by the Colony; the sums advanced by Government; the original amount of the estimate; the calculated excess for works yet to be completed; the arrangements made by the Colony for finding funds to finish the works; and the decision of Government in regard to advancing the balance of the promised loan of £250,000; and, whether the Minute of the Lieutenant Governor, reviewing the state of the works and the expenditure, will be laid before Parliament?

The harbour works were commenced in 1876, and considerable progress has been made. The south-west breakwater is nearly completed. The question of proceeding with or deferring the northern breakwater is under the consideration of the Ceylon Government. The total expenditure up to August 31, 1882, was £542,177. There has been £125,000 advanced by Government. The original Estimate was £630,000. The consulting engineer places the probable total cost, including the additional breakwater, at £903,710. The Legislative Council of Ceylon has agreed to provide a further sum of £150,000. The balance of a £125,000 loan from the Public Works Commissioners is available when required; but the credit of the Ceylon Government is so good that, for the present, they are able to borrow at a more favourable rate in the open market.

asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether the attention of the Government of India has been turned to the evils of the Law which sanctions imprisonment, of a large number of persons, for debt in that Country; whether it is a fact that a vindictive creditor in Madras may keep the debtor for a long time in gaol, on paying for him, as subsistence money, if he be destitute, seven rupees per month, while the prisoner costs the Government, on the average, twenty-six rupees per month; and, whether the whole subject is likely to be early considered, with a view to the reform of the Law?

The law relating to the imprisonment of judgment debtors in India is contained in the Indian Civil Procedure Code (Act 14 of this year). No one can (Section 342) be imprisoned in execution of a decree of a Civil Court for a longer period than six months, or for a longer period than six weeks, if the decree is for a sum not exceeding 50 rupees; and a debtor who has once been discharged cannot be re-arrested under the decree in execution of which he was imprisoned. As to the maintenance of debtors in prison, the Local Government is empowered (Section 338) to prescribe scales, graduated according to rank, race, and nationality, of monthly subsistence allowances. The subsistence allowance is payable by the decree holder in advance; and when the prisoner is committed to gaol the Court formally fixes the amount, fixing it according to the scales prescribed by the Local Government; or, if no such scales have been prescribed, allowing such sum as seems necessary with reference to the class to which the debtor belongs (Section 339). I have no information as to what are the scales of such subsistence allowance in common use in Madras. The Civil Procedure Code has this year been revised and re-enacted; and I have no reason to suppose that the Government of India contemplates any further amendment of the law at present.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If the Historical Manuscripts Commissioners will print in their next, or an early volume, the Catalogue of the Scottish State Papers and other Historical Records relating to Scotland recently acquired by the German Government from the Hamilton Collection.

, in reply, said, that an account of the Historical Manuscripts at Hamilton Palace had been drawn up by Dr. Smart, of Edinburgh, for the Historical Manuscripts Commission, and their Report was issued in 1870. Under these circumstances, it was doubtful whether there was any necessity for reprinting the catalogues.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether there are any British ships of war in the neighbourhood of Madagascar; and, if so, to state their names and force?

The gun-vessel Seagull and two small schooners are at present at Zanzibar. On the East Indian Station, which includes Madagascar, we have, besides the flag ship, two corvettes, three sloops, and four gun-vessels. I may add that the Fawn, a surveying vessel, is also at this moment at St. Augustine's, on the West Coast of Madagascar.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether it is true that a ship called the "Florence," supposed to contain arms, was seized at Jamaica under the Imperial Foreign Enlistment Act; that the owners in consequence brought an action against the Governor of Jamaica, and gained it; that, on appeal, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council upheld the decision; that the Governor of Jamaica, acting on the precedent of the Lahave case, asked to be indemnified for his act by the Imperial Government; that the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in reply to his application, informed him that the sum must be voted by the Jamaica Council; whether it is a fact that two of the official Members of the Jamaica Council resigned their seats on this account; whether, in consequence of their resigning, the Secretary of State for the Colonies addressed an official Despatch to the Governor ordering him so to fill up these two vacancies as to insure the passing of this Vote, and suggesting the name of one gentleman and leaving it to the Governor to name the other; whether it is true that, owing to this action on the part of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, the sum of money having been voted by the Government majority in Council, the whole of the unofficial Members of the Council have resigned, as stated in a recent telegram; and, whether Her Majesty's Government will lay all the Papers relating to this transaction, together with the Despatch, upon the Table of the House? The hon. Member said that he wished to explain the first paragraph of the Question, otherwise it would not be perfectly clear. The following letter had been addressed by His Excellency Sir Anthony Musgrave, the Governor of Jamaica, to Mr. Thomas Capper, Chief Inspector of Schools in the Island—

"(Private.)—Flamstead, August 5.—My dear Sir,—I have been directed by the Secretary of State to ascertain, confidentially whether you will accept one of the seats in the Legislative Council rendered vacant by the resignation of Messrs. Mackglashan and Burke, with the essential condition that you will be prepared to support the proposals of Government, not only in the question of the Florence damages, but always when called upon. I shall be obliged if you can favour me with an early reply.—Very faithfully yours, A. MUSGRAVE.—Mr. T. Capper."

"Sir,—I have to acknowledge the receipt of Your Excellency's private letter of the 5th inst. Should I have the honour of being offered a seat in the Legislative Council, I should have no objection in accepting it subject to the conditions stated by Your Excellency.—I am, &c, THOS. CAPPER."

The most convenient way to answer the hon. Member's string of Questions is by laying the Papers on the Table of the House, which I will do. I would point out, however, an important error in his Question. It was not under an Imperial, but under a local Act that the Florence was seized; nor was there any decision given by the Judicial Committee on the merits, but only on an interlocutory appeal about the pleadings. Lastly, only half of the cost incurred was demanded by the Imperial Government to be paid by the Colony, as the Imperial Government was anxious only to call upon the Colony to bear the minimum of charge consistent with a reasonable view of the Colony's responsibility in the matter.

asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether it is a fact that certain magistrates in the county of Galway have refused to take the affidavits of persons endeavouring to obtain the benefits of the Arrears Act, and are still refusing, notwithstanding the injunction of the Lord Lieutenant and the statement made by the Attorney General himself in this House?

Sir, I do not know whether certain magistrates in Galway County have refused to take affidavits under the Arrears Act; but if it has been so, it will not, I apprehend, be so in future; because some days since, in consequence of a Question put to me by the hon. Member, His Excellency caused all the Resident Magistrates in Ireland to be apprized of his desire that every facility should be afforded to persons desiring to make affidavits under that Act, and I have reason to believe that this has already been attended with good results.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that the occupations of the majority of the inhabitants of Dublin prevent them from being within their houses constantly after five o'clock p.m., or earlier; whether he is aware that, in the case of very large numbers of the poorest inhabitants the wretched nature of their homes, frequently single rooms in badly-ventilated quarters, renders their compulsory confinement from five p.m. to eight a.m. every day both painful and unhealthy; and, what steps he will take to allow the inhabitants of Dublin, especially the poorest classes, to walk in the open air after five p.m. during the winter?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the city of Dublin has been proclaimed under the provisions of the curfew section of the Crimes Act, and upon whose representations and with what object this has been done?

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that, according to Thom's Almanac, the sun set in Dublin yesterday evening at 3.43 o'clock P.M., and rose this morning at 7.53 o'clock A.M.?

I will answer the Questions of the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell) first. The City of Dublin has been proclaimed under the provisions of the Curfew Section of the Prevention of Crime3 Act. It was done on the representations of those who are responsible for the peace of the city and for the lives of the citizens; and it was done to preserve that peace and to save those lives. With reference to the Question of the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell), I beg to assure him that the powers of the section will not be directed against the people whose comfort and health he desires should be protected. The following supplemental Proclamation has been issued by the Lord Lieutenant: —

"Whereas certain atrocious crimes have lately been committed in the City of Dublin, evidently the work of a secret society, and whereas we, being determined to afford every protection to peaceable and law-abiding citizens, have this day, with the advice of the Privy Council, issued a Proclamation declaring Section 11 of the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, 1882, to be in force in the City of Dublin; now, we John Poyntz, Earl Spencer, Lord Lieutenant General and General Governor of Ireland, hereby give notice that the powers will be so used as not to interfere with the comfort or convenience of any peaceful and law-abiding citizens, but will be directed against persons believed to be engaged in prosecuting criminal designs."

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman who are to be the judges in case of arrests as to whether the persons arrested are about to engage, or are engaged, in criminal designs? I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether the police, in the first instance, will be the judge as to that in making the arrest; and, secondly, I wish to ask him, whether the persons arrested at night will be brought at once before a magistrate, or whether they will be kept in dirty police cells in the company of people of bad character during the whole night on suspicion? Thirdly, I wish to ask him whether the proceedings against the persons arrested in this way will be conducted in public or in private?

I think it would be decidedly more convenient that I should answer these Questions tomorrow.

I beg to give Notice of them for to-morrow, and I shall also ask the right hon. Gentleman, if he will lay upon the Table of the House Copies of the Instructions which have been issued to the police authorities in Dublin as to the way in which the Act is to be administered?

gave Notice that, on the same day, he would ask, whether, considering the power given under the Prevention of Crime Act to Justices of detaining persons for seven days before bringing them before the Court, the Irish Executive would issue special instructions to the Justices in this regard considering the large number of persons on the streets of Dublin, and the probability of innocent persons being arrested.

gave Notice that, on the same occasion, he would ask, whether the provisions of the Act would be enforced against persons of a certain character who were in the habit of walking through Sackville Street and Grafton Street, and with regard to whom complaints had been made time after time to the Government?

gave Notice that, on the same occasion, he would ask, whether, considering that the police were to be largely reinforced from Manchester and Liverpool and other towns, unacquainted with the people of Dublin, what precautions would be used to prevent mistakes in the persons arrested?

asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether an English born person in India can be sentenced to penal servitude for life on the decision of a single judge without a jury?

This Question is asked in continuation of others which have been put to me on the subject of the Salem trials, where certain persons have been convicted and sentenced to penal servitude by a single Judge sitting with assessors. It is the fact that no European British subject can be so sentenced by a single Judge without a jury. But this bare statement would give a very inadequate idea of the relations before the law of Europeans and Natives, without some reference to the extensive changes which have been made by recent legislative measures. It would take too long to state what those changes have been; but it may be enough to say that formerly Europeans could be tried only in the Presidency towns with a jury, and all cases had to be sent to those towns, and Natives were invariably tried by a single Judge without a jury; but now provision has been made for the local trial, with a jury, of Europeans committing grave offences beyond the limits of the Presidency towns, and also for a system of jury trials to be extended to all parts of India in which the state of society admits of it. It has already been extended to some parts of India, and will doubtless extend further whenever the Local Governments, advised by the High Courts, deem it practicable. Wherever jury trial does not exist, a Native is tried by a Judge with assessors, subject to appeal to the High Court.

said, that the noble Marquess had stated that though no British-born subject could be sentenced to penal servitude without having been found guilty by a jury, yet that Natives could be so sentenced by a Judge with the aid of two assessors. He wished to know whether it was also the fact that a Native could be sentenced to penal servitude for life by a single Judge acting in opposition to the opinion of both assessors? Also, whether it was not the case that a Native surgeon had been recently sentenced to penal servitude for life against the opi- nions of both assessors, and had been transported to his place of punishment without waiting for the result of his appeal?

said, that he had already answered the Question of the hon. Member. When a trial took place before a single Judge with two assessors under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Judge was bound to hear the opinion of the assessors; but was, of course, obliged to act on his own responsibility and judgment.

asked if the noble Marquess would take any steps to delay the infliction of the punishment of penal servitude on the gentleman referred to, pending the decision of the Appeal Court?

said, that he had no official information as to the proceedings in the case mentioned, and he had no knowledge of it except from what he had seen in the newspapers. He had no doubt the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code would be strictly enforced, and he had no reason to believe that any injustice would be inflicted by them.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, from a Return ordered by the House on the 9th instant, and presented on the 20th,

"Of any Documents (except Official Documents of a confidential and privileged character) in the nature of Evidence or Memorials submitted for the Consideration of the Irish Executive with reference to the case of Francis Hynes; and, of any Letters written to or by the Lord Lieutenant with reference to such Documents,"

As a general rule, the materials on which the Lord Lieutenant exercises the Prerogative of Mercy are, perhaps, the last information which should be communicated to the House. In the case of Francis Hynes, out of justice to the jury, whose character had been attacked, the Government thought it proper to depart from this course. But I certainly contend that, by the form of the Return, the right was retained by the Government as to what letters should be included in that Return. If, however, the hon. Member will move for the presentation to the House of his Letter of the 25th of August, the Government has no objection to give it.

And the reply thereto?

Yes.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office, Whether, in consequence of the loss in horses in connection with the Egyptian Campaign, an additional sum will have to be taken for cavalry remounts?

Yes, Sir. In consequence of the loss of horses in the Egyptian Campaign, an additional sum has been taken for the Cavalry remounts, and this is included in the total amount of the war expenses given by the Prime Minister. Perhaps it may be interesting to the House to learn the exact state of the Cavalry regiments as regards horses who took part in the Egyptian Campaign. The Household Cavalry horses are now fit for, and are performing, ordinary duty. They lost, on an average, 30 per squadron, or 90 in all, including those killed in action. The Field Artillery horses are, for the most part, nearly fit for duty. The mortality among the horses of the regiments remaining in Egypt has not been of a very exceptional character, and has been due principally to climatic causes. The 7th Dragoon Guards have lost 72, and the 19th Hussars 50 horses. Both regiments have now been removed from Cairo, and the horses have much benefited by the change. The whole of the Artillery are also encamped outside Cairo. There remain the 4th Dragoon Guards, who have lost 267 horses, and a troop of Horse Artillery, who lost 96 horses. The mortality among these is decreasing, and the 4th Dragoon Guards have 200 horses now fit for easy duty. But it will not be forgotten that this regiment made a forced march of 70 miles in less than 48 hours, and that not a trooper lay down nor a horse was unsaddled until Cairo was safe.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Her Majesty's Government will consider the possibility of giving to the remnant of the Celtic population of Scotland the same legal recognition of their ancient rights in the land which has been so liberally granted to the Irish?

asked the right hon. Gentleman, before answering the Question, if he was aware that one of the most important points in dispute between the Skye crofters and one of the largest landed proprietors in Skye had just been settled by friendly arrangement; and, whether he did not think that such an arrangement so made was better than vague suggestions about ancient rights, or any interference by Parliament?

The intelligence to which the hon. Member opposite has referred has not reached me; but I receive it with great satisfaction. I was about to have answered my hon. Friend that the relative rights of parties were so far in course of progress towards being fixed that the first step had been taken on the part of the landlords for the purpose of having them fixed; and that I did not think that a period like that, when difficulty attended that step and the actual execution of the law, was the time for raising any question of the nature of the Question; but I receive with great satisfaction what has been stated by the hon. Gentleman.

inquired whether the right hon. Gentleman would consider that, as the principal point in dispute between landlord and tenant had been removed, there was no longer any necessity for an inquiry?

With the greatest possible respect to the hon. Member, and to the hon. Gentleman opposite, I think I may say the House will feel that I must wait for some further and more definite statement on the subject before I undertake to answer anything of the nature of the Question put to me just now.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, as the Land Act of 1881 makes the drainage loan the first charge on the tenant's holding, and as the tenant must execute a deed of covenant for the due application of the money, and repayment of the loan, and the works are inspected from time to time by the Inspector of the Board of Works, the Treasury is sufficiently protected, without subjecting the tenant to the expense, delay, and difficulty of getting two solvent sureties to execute a deed of covenant for the repayment of the loan; and, whether he will, under these circumstances, recommend the last condition to be dispensed with?

, in reply, said, that in an argumentative Question the hon. Member suggested that there was sufficient security for the loan in the value of the holding; but in cases where the Treasury in England would be brought in immediate relation with small holders of land in Ireland, he must consider what position they would be placed in if they looked to the value of the land alone as their security. He was not prepared at present to take the course proposed; but he might, at the same time, assure the hon. Member that any suggestion having for its object the easy working of the Act in this particular would be carefully examined, and its practicability considered.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he can afford facilities, before the end of the Session, for a discussion upon the administration and defects of the Land Law Act of 1881?

The administration and defects, real or assumed, of the Land Act form a subject of great interest, to which this House may not seem disinclined to recur from time to time; but I am bound to say—particularly when I remember the discussions which we have already had—that I do not think that the question stands in a position which would justify me in asking the House to depart from its present plan of proceeding in order to meet the views of the hon. Member.

gave Notice that he would ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ire- land, Whether it was true that Lord Ventry had intimated to his tenants that he would not join them in making applications to the Court under the Act unless they should first have repaid to him the money allowed as abatement in past periods of distress?

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he can submit to the House the calculation which the Bight honourable Member for Ripon, about October 1876, showed to the Khedive, purporting to demonstrate that the application to the reduction of the Egyptian Debt of the yearly proceeds of the Moukabala; viz., £1,500,000 yearly for nine years, would reduce said debt from £90,000,000 to £35,000,000, i.e. by the year 1885; whether it is not the fact that, though said proceeds of the Moukabala were duly applied to the reduction of said debt, it was never appreciably reduced at all; and, whether, in fact, the said calculation did not show the foresaid favourable result by omitting altogether from the account of the necessary charges against the Re-venue, both the principal of the floating debt amounting to (say) £20,000,000, and the interest thereon at about £25 per cent., which the Khedive had to pay to keep it floating?

I may answer this Question very briefly, to the effect that all the facts bearing upon this question are, I believe, contained in a document before the House.

I wish, by the kind indulgence of the House, to be permitted to answer the Question in further detail. If this calculation submitted to the Khedive is not in the hands of the Government, it can easily be obtained by reference to the archives in Egypt; and, if not, I shall be happy to place my copy, if I can find it, in the hands of the Government, to make such use of it in the matter of publicity as they may think fit. The document is falsely described in the Question as—

"Purporting to demonstrate that the application to the reduction of the Egyptian Debt of the yearly proceeds of the Moukabala would reduce the debt from £90,000,000 to £35,000,000."

"Whether the said calculation did not show the foresaid favourable result by omitting altogether from the account of the necessary charges against the Revenue both the principal of the Floating—say, £20,000,000—Debt and the interest thereon?"

asked whether the Prime Minister, in accordance with the advice of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Courtney), that the bondholders should pay a portion of the War Debt they had done so much to create, would recommend the Khedive to reduce the sums payable to the bondholders represented by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon?

Perhaps I may at once repudiate the suggestion which the hon. Member makes, that I am a representative of the bondholders. I undertook an honorary mission in 1876. My connection with the bondholders was closed shortly after, and I no more represent the bondholders than any other Member of this House.

said, he did not say that the right hon. Gentleman represented the bondholders now, but when he went to Egypt.

asked whether the Prime Minister would grant facilities for the discussion of the circumstances under which the arrangement of 1876 was concluded; and, in particular, for the discussion of the manner in which the Finance Minister of Egypt disappeared during the negotiations between the Khedive and the representatives of the bondholders?

No, Sir; I do not think the granting of those facilities, as far as they depend upon the Government, would be desired by the House, or would be advantageous.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he will now give a day for the discussion of a Motion condemning the conduct of the Government for the surrender of Arabi Pasha; and, whether he has any statement to make with respect to the trial of Arabi Pasha?

With regard to the first part of this Question, I have to say that all the material circumstances of the case stand in the same position as that in which they stood at the time when I gave an answer to a previous Question on this subject. The reasons of public interest which prevented us from affording any facilities for the discussion, and which might preclude us from taking part—or, at least, any effectual part—in such a discussion, if raised, still subsist in their full force. Therefore, I have nothing to add to, or to take away from, the answer which I then gave. With regard to the second part of the Question, I have to say that there are several particulars connected with the proceeding in question which I am able to state with accuracy to the right hon. Gentleman and the House. The latest Report from Sir Charles Wilson, who is watching the trial on behalf of the Government, is dated the 12th instant. It appears from this Report that the preliminary inquiry into the cases under investigation was closed on the 6th current, and that on the 12th current the Commission issued notices to the counsel for the prosecution and for the defence laying down the course of procedure to be followed, and fixing November 25 as the day on which the second part of the inquiry should commence in the case of those trials in which the first inquiry had been closed, and sufficient ground shown for the committal of the prisoners. Thirty days will be allowed for the hearing of the evidence in the second portion of the inquiry, which will thus close on December 25, our Christmas Day. The Government have not yet heard whether the second part of the inquiry was actually opened on the 25th instant, nor what prisoners have been committed for trial; but they believe that the inquiry was not opened on the 25th.

Is the inquiry to be closed on a certain specified day, no matter whether all the evidence has been heard or not?

A specific day has been fixed on which the second inquiry is expected to close. I may, perhaps, be able to give a more definite answer hereafter.

What is the meaning of the statement that Sir Charles Wilson was watching the case on behalf of the English Government? Is he empowered to examine and cross-examine witnesses?

I believe that my expression that Sir Charles Wilson was watching the case was an accurate expression. It is an expression of familiar use in connection with public trials. He has no power of interference in the trial; but he will know all that takes place.

The right hon. Gentleman says that the question is in a similar position to that in which it formerly stood. There is, then, I suppose, no intention of abandoning the trial altogether, as has been stated in the newspapers?

I am not in a position to give any information upon that subject; but we have not received any announcement that such a step is contemplated.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House any general information about Egyptian affairs this Session?

It is impossible to answer that Question in a manner which would be satisfactory to the hon. Member, because we do not know when the Session will close. All I can say is that all information which can be communicated to the House, without injury to the Public Service, we shall be very desirous to make known to the House at the earliest opportunity.

My Question had reference to information already received.

pointed out that there were two sets of rules of procedure agreed to by the Commission of Inquiry, and that under one set it was laid down that the defence was to be perfectly froe to examine witnesses deemed expedient, the President having a right to declare the inquiry closed if the desire of the counsel to prolong uselessly the case was manifest; while under the other set of rules the whole case for the defence must, under all circumstances, be completed by the 25th of December. He wished to know whether that last regulation of the Commission of Inquiry coincided with the agreement that was come to between the Egyptian Government and counsel?

In order that I may be quite safe in answering this Question, I shall be glad if the hon. Member will give me Notice of his intention to put it on a future day.

wished to refer to a document quoted the other day by the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant. The document, having been quoted in the House, ought to be presented and laid upon the Table. He wished for a positive assurance that it would be presented.

said, that he had consulted the Clerk at the Table, and come to the conclusion that it was not possible to traverse the statement that the House was entitled to the document in question. That being so, he would make a further application to the Land Commissioners, who were concerned in the matter, for leave to produce the desired Memorandum.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would lay upon the Table any communications from the Land Commission expressive of dissent from the recent decision of the Government in regard to Court valuers?

Sir, I beg leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter, of urgent public importance—namely, the extent to which the Land Act of 1881 has failed to carry out the intentions of Parliament and to satisfy the reasonable expectations of the Irish people; and the alterations necessary for the purpose of enabling that Act to fulfil their requirements.

Will the hon. Gentleman be good enough to give me in writing the definite matter to which he has now referred

To a point of Order, Sir—I wish to ask whether, when the right hon. and learned Gentleman above the Gangway (Mr. Gibson) asked leave to move the Adjournment a few nights ago, he was requested by you to bring up a definite statement?

I have considered it my duty upon former occasions, when the same Motion was proposed to be made, to call upon the Member making it to bring up a definite statement to the Chair, because the Resolution of the House requires that the Motion made shall be for the discussion of some definite matter of urgent public importance; and, with the view of keeping the discussion to that matter, it is necessary that I should have the terms in my hand in writing.

Sir, I wish again to ask whether, when the right hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin moved the Adjournment of the House on Tuesday, he handed to the Speaker a definite statement in writing?

I have already stated that on both recent occasions when the Adjournment of the House was moved a definite statement was handed to me.

having accordingly come to the Table with his statement in writing—

Does the hon. Member desire to ask leave of the House to move the adjournment?

I do, Sir.

Is it your pleasure that Mr. Parnell be now heard? And there being many voices for and against—

said: Is the proposal of the hon. Member supported by 40 Members? Whereupon, a number of Members—less than 40—rising in their places—

said: The hon. Member for the City of Cork cannot proceed with his Motion.