, gave Notice, that he should ask the Secretary of State for War, Whether he will cause to be printed, and lay on the Table of the House, the Memorandum with respect to the attendance of British soldiers at the sending of the "Holy Carpet" from Cairo to Mecca?

, in reply, said, he could at once answer the Question of the hon. Member. The Memorandum had already been laid on the Table of the House; but he had nothing to do with the printing, as to which the hon. Member bad better consult the authorities of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for War, If he will lay upon the Table a Copy of the Memorial presented to the War Department by Mr. Lynal Thomas and the Correspondence which has passed between Mr. Thomas and the War Office since July 1882, having reference to a claim for repayment of expenses in connection with heavy rifled cannon?

Sir, as I cannot see that any public object would be gained by producing the documents officially, I cannot undertake to lay the Correspondence on the Table. Mr. Thomas has, no doubt, the Correspondence in his possession, and there can be no objection to his publishing it, if he thinks fit.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, What steps have been taken by the Commissioners of Sewers under "The Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Act, 1882," towards ensuring the building of suitable accommodation on the ground cleared under the Act of 1875?

Sir, the delay in this matter has been mainly due to the fact that the Commissioners of Sewers, on the 15th December last, submitted a scheme which was not found to be entirely satisfactory, and the Home Office could not sanction it. On the 28th of February they submitted a second scheme. That being also unsatisfactory, was declined; and on the 10th of April a third scheme was submitted, which it was found possible to adopt, and which had been approved of.

Then there will be no further delay?

No doubt, Sir, the matter will be gone on with.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he will take into consideration whether some special and adequate acknowledgment can be given to the police officers who were engaged in the discovery or removal of the dynamite and other explosive materials recently captured?

I hope, Sir, from what I have said in this House as to what I feel, and the Government feel, that hon. Members will not think that there is any disinclination to appreciate and to recognize in all proper ways the services which the police have rendered. But I appeal to the hon. Member and the House generally, whether it is not far better to leave the administration of the police generally—where I think it ought to be—in the hands of the Executive Government in this, as in other matters?

said, there were other persons who ought to be rewarded equally as well as the police; and for that reason he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman a Question arising out of the last Question. It was, Were the Government going to reward the experts who had shown so much courage and skill in destroying the large quantity of nitro-glycerine at Birmingham? It was a very dangerous operation, and it was performed with great success. Some years ago they had, in Newcastle, a very serious accident in consequence of attempting to destroy some nitro-glycerine near that town. There were eight persons killed in doing it, amongst them the Sheriff of Newcastle, the Town Surveyor, and, indeed, all who were present. He saw that the Birmingham Corporation, with Brummagem generosity, had voted Mr. Mae-ready, who destroyed the glycerine, the handsome sum of £10. He wished to know if the Government were prepared to supplement the gift by recognizing better Mr. Macready's great services?

I am not sorry to have this opportunity of bearing my testimony to the courage and skill exhibited by all the gentlemen who were not connected with the Police Force—by Major Majendie, the Inspector of Explosives, by Dr. Dupré, the eminent chemist, and by the other gentlemen to whom the hon. Member (Mr. Cowen) has alluded; and, also, I have no doubt by others who have risked their lives in order to secure the public safety. But again I would ask that the House, feeling that the Government are not insensible of these things, should leave the matter to the Executive.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, When the translation of Papers from the Spanish Red Book concerning Gibraltar will be distributed?

, in reply, said, it was hoped that the Papers respecting maritime jurisdiction in Gibraltar waters would be distributed in the course of the present week.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to a statement in the newspapers, that seventy Glendale Crofters have been served, or are about to be served, with notices of eviction; and, if this statement is correct, whether he proposes to take any steps to prevent the removal of the people pending an inquiry into their case by the Royal Commission?

Sir, I have no knowledge of the details to which the first part of the Question of the hon. Member alludes; and with regard to the second part, the hon. Gentleman must be aware that I have no power to suspend the operations of the law. It would, moreover, be a very bad thing if we thought that the appointment of an impartial inquiry should offer any justification or excuse for the non-observance of the law. On the contrary, the existence of such an inquiry ought rather to encourage people to be patient, and to observe the law.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to the proposals made by a Committee presided over by the Lord Mayor having reference to the extension of the present cab radius; if he will take into his consideration the question of its enlargement; and, if he would be prepared to to adopt the plan of limiting the distance for which a cab can be hired for a sixpence a mile to five miles from the place of hiring, and that beyond that distance, whether within or without the Metropolitan limits, the fare shall be one shilling for each mile or part of a mile?

Sir, it is, no doubt, a very interesting matter; but the Report of the Committee presided over by the Lord Mayor is not yet before me. When it is, I shall be willing to consider it. But it should be remembered that there are two parties to be considered in this matter. We must consider the interests, not only of the public, but also of the cabmen, before we deal exhaustively with this matter, and the latter will have to be heard upon it.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office, with reference to the mules purchased by Major Carré for the Egyptian Expedition, Whether they have as yet been paid for; if so, it being acknowledged that the Veterinary Surgeon who accompanied Major Carré to Smyrna refused to pass the mules, and that the Committee appointed to report on them on their arrival at Ismalia reported only 198 out of a consignment of 612 animals as fit for service; by whose authority the payment was made?

Sir, the mules alluded to in the hon. Member's Question as purchased at Smyrna, were paid for in London, under the terms of the contract, on the receipt of the mules in Egypt being certified by the local military authorities. The Board hold in Egypt declared 198 mules to be fit for immediate service; the majority of the remainder wore fit, and wont to work within five to 14 days afterwards.

further inquired, whether it was customary to pay for animals purchased under the inspection of a veterinary surgeon, when that veterinary surgeon had refused to pass them?

It is not the case, Sir, that the veterinary surgeon refused to pass the mules in question.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether there is any prospect that the Government will during the present Session do anything to satisfy the expectation raised by his right honourable predecessor's answer to a deputation which last year urged upon the Board the need of further regulating the use of steam traction engines upon high roads?

, in reply, said, that the important representations made by the deputation had been carefully considered by the Local Government Board. While the Board admitted the desirability of imposing some further restrictions on the use of these engines, looking to the measures proposed for the present Session, they were unable to hold out any expectation of a Government measure on the subject being introduced this year.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether a Circular has been issued to mail carriers, forbidding them to carry after the 2nd of July next any parcels not exceeding seven younds in weight, otherwise than as part of Her Majesty's mails; and, whether he is aware that the effect of this prohibition will be seriously to cripple the early delivery of newspapers in rural districts; and, if so, whether he will kindly consider the possibility of withdrawing or modifying this Circular?

asked the Postmaster General, Whether the drivers of Mail carts, although prohibited from taking passengers, have been allowed by the Post Office authorities to carry parcels, and have done so to a large extent for the newspaper press; whether, as the new rate for parcels post delivery of newspapers will be much greater than the sums hitherto paid to the drivers of Mail carts, it will be possible to charge the newspaper press, as regular and wholesale customers, a lower rate; whether it is the fact that Railway Companies carry newspaper parcels at half their ordinary parcel rates; and, whether the Government Telegraph Department charges the press a much less sum for telegrams than is charged for private telegrams, without injury to the Telegraph Department and with great advantage to the public?

I think, Sir, it will be convenient if I answer the Question of the hon. Member (Mr. Stuart-Wortley) and that of the hon. Member for South Northamptonshire (Mr. P. Phipps) at the same time. I believe it will be admitted that it would not be expedient to allow mail contractors to carry parcels which would compete with the parcels to be carried by parcels post; and, in my opinion, it would be very undesirable for the Post Office to depart, as suggested, from the principle of uniformity of charge, and allow parcels of newspapers to be carried at a lower rate of postage than other parcels. I should, however, so much regret that the introduction of the parcels post should in any way interfere with the cheap and early circulation of newspapers in the rural districts, that I will consider whether any arrangements can be made for allowing contractors to continue to carry parcels of newspapers so long as the carrying of these parcels in no way interferes with the delivery of the parcel and letter mails.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether all ship classification clubs are merely for purposes of insurance; and, whether, as almost all the matters connected with merchant shipping are now regulated by the Board of Trade, he will consider whether it is not advisable that a more strict survey and classification of all merchant vessels should be placed under the supervision of the Board of Trade?

Sir, the clubs mentioned in the Question do exist chiefly for purposes of insurance. As regards the proposal to secure a more strict survey and classification of all merchant vessels under the supervision of the Board of Trade, I am not prepared to propose any legislation which would so largely increase the duties of the Board, and so largely interfere with private responsibilities.

asked the Lord Advocate, Whether the Keeper of the Register of Sasines (salary £1,000) assumes the position that he is not responsible for the discharge of the business of the office by the staff engaged therein; whether, during the past six months, after intimation of supposed defalcations, he allowed weeks to elapse before taking the trouble to call at the office to institute personal inquiries; and, whether John Calder Bryce, one of the inculpated clerks, after admitting his guilt, was for several days allowed to frequent the Register House, or at least went about so publicly as to permit of easy capture?

Sir, I am not aware of any ground for the suggestion that the Keeper of the Register of Sasines assumes the position described in the Question. He informs me that he has never done so, and that he does not consider his position to be different from that of any other head of a Department of the Civil Service. When the suspicion of defalcations arose in the Sasine Office, the Keeper was absent on holiday in the month of August. He considered that it would be injudicious for him to return to Edinburgh at an unusual time, as his doing so would have given rise to remark throughout the Office, and not improbably have defeated the discovery of the suspected frauds; but he immediately gave the necessary instructions for inquiries being instituted, and they were well and properly conducted. John Calder Bryce never admitted that he had participated in the frauds. On his admitting that he knew that two other clerks had made higher charges than they were entitled to, he was immediately suspended, and the fact of his having made the admission was communicated to the Procurator Fiscal. A few days afterwards, he absconded; and, up to the time of his doing so, there was no evidence to warrant a criminal charge against him.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether engines and boilers built and engined by private firms for the Navy, are guaranteed and upheld for six months, according to custom in orders for supplying merchant shipping; and, whether there will be any objection to laying upon the Table of the House a Return of the costs and expenditure on Engines and Boilers so supplied since 31st March 1880?

Sir, by a clause in the form of contract for machinery, contractors are held responsible for the efficiency of the machinery for a period of 12 months after it has been accepted, and any parts which may, during that period, be found defective, or showing symptoms of weakness, owing to faulty design, materials, or workmanship, must be removed, and others substituted for them at the contractors' expense. This condition is always enforced; and there have been no costs or expenditure on the part of the public, such as my hon. Friend suggests might be included in a Return.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, What is the cost to Government of the ration allowed to a seaman in Her Majesty's Navy; whether, for convenience and economy to the Government, as well as for the comfort of the men, they are allowed to take the whole or part of this ration in money; if so, what sum of money does a man receive for his ration; and, if he would state what has this difference, between cost and value paid, amounted to annually during the last ten years, and in what way has it been made good to the men?

Sir, the seaman's rations cost between 11d. and 1s. a-day. For the convenience of the seaman, ho is allowed, within certain limits, to save such part of his rations as he may think proper, and for the quantities saved he is paid at fixed rates, averaging nearly three-fourths of the cost price. The terms are intended to have the effect—except in the case of rum—of somewhat discouraging the practice, as the full ration is presumed to be the best for the maintenance of the seaman's bodily health. The difference between the sums so paid and the cost of the provisions had they been issued, is estimated in the Department to be about £60,000 a-year, and the money required to be voted by Parliament for provisions is diminished by that amount. Any such payments as I have described are, I believe, unknown in the Merchant Service, and are a free boon to the men of the Navy; the arrangement is voluntarily entered into on their part; and they have no claim to the difference between the actual cost of the articles and their savings prices.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, seeing the urgent necessity for an adjustment of the levy and administration of both Local and Imperial Taxes, with a view to their being brought under a common principle of assessment and a more convenient system of collection, he will consider the expediency of effecting the requisite reform of the Income Tax before its administration be removed from the agencies now employed, and its enforcement, with all its inequalities, be more largely confided to Government officials?

Sir, my promise was given to look carefully into this question. My right hon. Friend has frequently urged a common principle of assessment for Income Tax, under Schedules A and B, and local rates; but he has not as yet secured the approval of Parliament for his plan, and I do not myself see why his advocacy of it should stand in the way of a very necessary reform in the manner of collection under Schedules D and E. I am afraid that I cannot comply with his request.

gave Notice that, in consequence of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, he would take an early opportunity of eliciting the opinion of the House on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether, in consequence of the contemplated change in the undress uniform of the Infantry of the Line, viz. from red to grey, it is intended to carry out the instructions for officers to provide themselves with the badges, forage caps, &c. of the new Territorial Regiments to which they now belong; and, whether any allowance will be made to officers, towards providing these new uniforms, after having already been put to a considerable expense during the last few years by frequent changes of uniform?

Sir, the badges and forage caps of officers will not be affected by the proposed change of uniform; and, therefore, there is no reason for modifying the instructions which have been given. The new undress uniform would be in substitution for the present uniform; and as officers would be allowed time to wear out their present uniforms, the change need not involve any expense to them. The new dress would probably cost less than that now worn, and officers would not have, as at present, to incur the charge for a new outfit when proceeding on active service.

said, he wished to know whether it had been decided to change the colour of the uniform from red to grey?

asked whether, if any change in the colour of the uniform was made, the noble Marquess would give the House an opportunity of discussing this very serious question? A fit and appropriate opportunity of doing so would arise when the Clothing Vote for the Army was brought forward. Pending the discussion, he trusted the noble Marquess would not give instructions to carry out the alteration.

In reply to the Question of the hon. Member for Guildford (Mr. Onslow), I have to say that I stated, in moving the Army Estimates, that no steps would be taken to carry out the change of uniform, but that there would be an experimental trial as to the change of colour recommended by the Committee. In answer to the hon. and gallant Baronet opposite (Sir Walter B. Barttelot), I admit it is desirable that the House should have an opportunity of discussing the subject, and I think a convenient opportunity will arise when the Clothing Estimate is proposed. No step can possibly be taken before that Vote is agreed to to prevent the House from coming to a conclusion on the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether the Committee appointed to inquire into matters connected with the Royal Hospitals of Chelsea and Kilmainham have sent in their Report; and, if so, if it will be laid upon the Table of the House?

Sir, I have received the Committee's Report; but I have not yet had time to consider its recommendations and the representations made to me by the Governing Bodies of the various institutions affected. I hope shortly to do so, and then the Report will be presented to Parliament.

asked the Postmaster General, If, when an application is made in a town or village for a post office, it is the practice to require the inhabitants to give a guarantee that the number of letters will cover the cost of the establishment, &c., and, if it is not usual to enforce such a condition with regard to a post office, why it is required in the case of a telegraph office, seeing that the Postal and Telegraph departments yield a large surplus revenue?

Sir, the practice of the Department is similar in both the eases to which the lion. Member refers. When the estimated revenue is insufficient, a guarantee is, as a rule, required.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whe- ther his attention has been called to a Circular issued on behalf of the Warrant Officers of the Navy; and, whether the Admiralty will consider the expediency of remedying the grievances of that class of public servants?

Sir, I have seen a copy of the Circular referred to; but I have no means of knowing how far it really represents the views of the warrant officers, as it is published anonymously. The Board of Admiralty have shown, by their recent action regarding what my hon. Friend will know as the "other ships" clause, that they are not indifferent to the claims of this class of public servants; and, while not holding out any expectation of a general increase of pay or retirement, if anything that requires attention is brought before the Board, it shall be carefully considered.

Do I understand that the question is now before the Board of Admiralty?

If anything requiring notice, as I have just said, is brought before the Board of Admiralty, it shall receive consideration.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If Her Majesty's Government have held communications with the Envoys from Madagascar since their return from the United States; and, if they have given any information as to their late negotiations with the French Government, and as to the attitude of that Government towards Madagascar?

asked, Whether the noble Lord would lay upon the Table the replies to the "Documents Diplomatiques Affairs de Madagascar 1881, 1883," in the French Yellow Book, which have been sent to the Foreign Office by the Government of Madagascar?

Sir, in reply to these Questions, I may state that the Madagascar Envoys, on the 7th of February, handed in to Lord Granville, for his personal information, an annotated copy of the French Yellow Book, together with a few brief notes on those parts of it which related to the recent discussions in Paris. These documents contain a personal defence of the conduct of the Envoys during the negotiations, rather than an answer to the French claims, as to which the Correspondence already laid shows the views of the Hova Government. As these Papers turn entirely upon the negotiations between the French and the Hova Governments, they cannot with propriety be presented to Parliament by Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the statement be correct which appeared in the Dublin "Freeman's Journal" of the 11th instant, that:—

"At a meeting of the governors of the Limerick Lunatic Asylum, a letter was read from the Lord Lieutenant forbidding in all cases post-mortem examinations of lunatic patients, even when ordered by coroners at inquests;"

Sir, the newspaper paragraph referred to in the Question of my hon. Friend states only a part of the case, and is therefore misleading. What His Excellency has expressed his disapproval of is, not the holding of a post-mortem examination, but the conducting of such examination by the resident medical superintendent of the asylum in which the patient lived previous to his death. The ground of the objection is, that it is quite conceivable that a case might arise in which the chief officer of an asylum might be, to some extent, blameable for the death of a patient; and it therefore appears desirable that whenever a post-mortem examination is considered necessary, it should be conducted by an independent medical authority.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to the manner in which the Belfast Workhouse master's books have been kept for some time past; if it is correct that goods have been charged in the provision books as having been supplied to paupers, which were never supplied; is it true that at a meeting of the Belfast Guardians on the 10th of April 1883 the said books were examined by several of the Guardians and found to contain false entries, erasures, and numerous alterations, &c.; did the Local Government Board Inspector examine the books also, and declare publicly before the Board of Guardians on the said date that the master's books were "cooked;" is it true that, in the face of this information, the Guardians made no minute of the facts nor took any action in the matter; and, will he be good enough to say whether or not he will direct further inquiry into these disclosures?

Sir, the Local Government Board inform me that they have been in communication with their Inspector at Belfast on this subject, and that he has reported that it is the case that at the meeting of the Belfast Guardians last week, certain irregularities in the master's provision books were observed and commented on, and the Inspector suggested to the Guardians that the manner of keeping the book adopted by that officer called for examination. The Guardians seemed to concur in the necessity of such a course, and the Chairman said the matter would receive attention. No formal resolution, however, on the subject was passed. The Local Government Board, with whom I entirely concur, think it necessary that further inquiry should be made, and will so direct.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that one of the Sub-Commissioners under the Land Act is also Lieutenant Colonel of the Longford Militia; if so, whether he will be allowed to continue to hold both offices; and, what is his alleged qualification for the position of Sub-Commissioner?

Sir, Lieutenant Colonel Davys, recently appointed to be an Assistant Commissioner under the Land Act, is Major and Honorary Lieutenant Colonel of the 6th Battalion Rifle Brigade. He was appointed to be an Assistant Commissioner by the Viceroy, who, after careful inquiry, believed him qualified to discharge the duties of that post. The discharge of those duties will, in the opinion of the Irish Government, prevent his presence with his battalion if called out for training during the period of his appointment as Assistant Commissioner.

The right lion. Gentleman said the Lord Lieutenant had satisfied himself that this gentleman was qualified. I would like to know what the qualifications are?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland Whether it is stated in the Rules and Regulations of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland that one of the chief objects of model schools is to promote united education; whether there are any model schools in which there is not even one Catholic teacher of the rank of principal or assistant; and, whether he can inform the House as to the number of separate Model School Departments in which there is no Catholic teachers, or none above the rank of pupil teacher or monitor?

Sir, it is the case that one of the chief objects of model schools is to promote united education. There are four such schools in which there is no Catholic teacher of the rank of principal or assistant; but, in three of these, there are Catholic pupil teachers or monitors. There are 28 separate departments of model schools in Ireland in which there is no Catholic teacher above the rank of pupil teacher or monitor; but hon. Members from that country will agree with me that the majority of the children attending most of the model schools are Protestants, and in filling vacancies in the office of teacher in any school, the Commissioners have thought it reasonable and just to appoint persons of the same religion as that of the pupils who constitute the actual attendance at the school. I only make this addition to make the answer more complete.

asked, whether that rule had always been observed?

, in reply, said, he could not say.

I would like to know, whether, in most of the towns in which the pupils attending the model schools are Protestant, the vast majority of the children of the locality are not Catholics?

I do not think the hon. Member really requires my answer to that Question.

asked the Secretary of State for War, What was the number of officers and men wanting on the 1st April 1883 to complete the establishment of the Army and the Militia respectively in the United Kingdom?

Sir, on the 1st of April the Army at home was 6,256 under its Establishment. A large part of the deficiency in the Army at home is to be accounted for by a cause of which the action has been constant, with the result that the Army is at its lowest numbers about April in each year. The Establishments voted cannot be exceeded, and, therefore, they are only reached just before the departure of the Indian drafts in the winter season, and consequently, after that period, the regiments have to be recruited again by a gradual process up to their full complement. In the Estimates of this year I have arranged to meet this difficulty in a measure. The Militia Force was, on the 1st of April, 22,174 men below its Establishment. Of this number 6,500 belonged to the Irish Militia, for which recruiting has, in recent years, been suspended. As regards this force, the actual numbers have never amounted to the Establishment, which is the extreme limit up to which regiments would be permitted to recruit, and it never can be full, in consequence of the incessant drain upon it caused by recruits passing to the Line,

Perhaps the noble Marquess will state what the actual number of the Reserve was at that time?

I am afraid I cannot answer that Question without Notice.

May I ask whether, in consequence of the great number of men wanting on the Establishment, the noble Marquess will take into consideration the suggestion I made last year, that a certain number of soldiers, on completing their Army engagements—say, up to 25 per cent—shall be allowed to re-engage instead of wandering idly about the country?

The subject of the deficiency in the Army and the difficulty of recruiting is under consideration, and many suggestions have been made; but I can hardly be expected to enter into the subject on this occasion in reply to a Question.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether any report has been received from Gibraltar of the continued refusal of the Roman Catholic community of the place to acknowledge Dr. Canilla as Vicar Apostolic, notwithstanding that he was forcibly placed in possession of the temporalities of the Roman Catholic Church by order from Lord Kimberley; whether, in consequence of this refusal, the Roman Catholic community are practically deprived of the religious ministrations of their Church at baptisms, weddings, and funerals; and, whether Her Majesty's Government have taken or will take any steps to restore a more satisfactory state of things among the Roman Catholics at Gibraltar?

Sir, a renewed protest has been received against the appointment to this post of Dr. Canilla, adopted at a meeting held at Gibralter on the 2nd of March. The Papers presented to Parliament last year show that beyond the dispersion of a mob, which unlawfully obstructed Dr. Canilla's installation, the Government did not interfere. The Governor reports that the services are well attended, and civil funerals are diminishing. Beyond preserving the peace. Her Majesty's Government do not consider it their duty to interfere in these affairs of the Roman Catholic community at Gibraltar.

The Question is, Whether the Roman Catholic community are not obliged to go out of Gibraltar for the ministrations referred to?

In the form in which the Question is asked, that result is put as an inference, and not as an inquiry as to a fact.

Are they not, in consequence of their refusal to accept the services of Dr. Canilla, compelled to go outside for baptisms and weddings?

Yes, a great many do, no doubt; but they go of their own free choice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, What opportunity, if any, the Joint Committee on the proposed Submarine Railway between England and France will have for considering its effects on our Mercantile Marine; and, seeing that it is not the business of any person or body to bring forward evidence on the subject, he will invite representatives of Chambers of Commerce and of the shipping interests to attend?

Sir, the consideration of the subject mentioned in the Question will be entirely within the discretion of the Joint Committee as soon as it is appointed. They will be able to call witnesses on that or any other branch of the matter; and, if any person desires to communicate with them, no doubt he will be able to do so through the Chairman.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he will communicate to the House the names of the witnesses for the defence of the prisoner Brady, who were examined by Mr. Curran at the private inquiry held under the provisions of section 16 of the Crimes Act, and the dates of such several examinations; and, whe- ther a prison official was present within hearing at any of the interviews of Brady and his legal adviser; and, if so, whether he can give the dates of such interviews?

Sir, the only witness for the defence who was examined by Mr. Curran at the inquiry held under the Crimes Act was Thomas Little. He was examined on the 5th and 22nd of March; and I am informed, in a letter from Mr. Curran, that the reason he was examined was because persons who are under the suspicion of belonging to a secret society were known to have met frequently at his house, and he was examined because it was thought useful information could be obtained from him. In reply to an hon. Member, I have already stated that it was on the 7th April the names of the witnesses for the defence were communicated to the Crown Solicitor. I am informed that the prison officials were not within hearing at any interviews 'between the prisoners and their solicitors, and the Governor of Kilmainham Prison informs me that this rule was strictly observed in the case of Brady.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, arising out of the Question to the Chief Secretary, Whether he intends to take a similar course with reference to the prisoners charged with being concerned in the illegal possession of explosives as that adopted by the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant—that is to say, whether he intends to have the prison officials at interviews between prisoners and their legal advisers out of hearing, although within sight?

I have given instructions that the persons accused of being in possession of nitroglycerine, and acting in concert with persons outside, shall have no opportunity of making any communication to those persons outside which is not known to the police.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, Whether he proposes to carry out the provisions of the Statute passed by this House in 1877, with regard to the treatment of untried prisoners; whether he will carry out the Rules framed by his Predecessor in the Home Office, which provide that persons who are awaiting trial shall be permitted to have interviews with their legal advisers in the presence, though not in the hearing, of a prison official?

Sir, if I should find that the Prison Rules, as laid down, are, in my opinion, inconsistent with the public safety, I shall ask the authority of the House to act as the necessity of the ease requires.

That is no reply to my Question, which is a plain one. I must therefore ask the right hon. Gentleman to reply to it—for he has twice evaded doing so—otherwise I shall put it on the Paper. It is, Whether the Prison Rules, made under the authority of the Prison Act of 1877, by his Predecessor in Office, and the Statute which was passed by the last Parliament will be carried out?

Sir, the answer I have given is, I think, certainly distinct enough. If the hon. Member does not think it so, it is open to him to take any measures he thinks fit to obtain a more explicit answer. My intention is plain, and it is to take those measures which, in my opinion, are necessary for the public safety.

I shall put the Question to-morrow to the right hon. Gentleman?

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is his intention to persevere in his proposal to allow silver goods to be warehoused, so that the payment of Duty might be postponed until sale?

Sir, in reply to my hon. Friend, I have to say that I proposed the plan of the optional warehousing of silver, in show-rooms under the Queen's lock, with a view to duty being paid when the articles were sold, under the impression that that arrangement would be considered as a boon by the trade, who are subject to unequal treatment compared with other manufacturers of dutiable articles upon which duty is not required until they go into consumption. I find, however, that the plan is not considered a boon; and I have, therefore, no wish to press it further. As regards the repeal of the duty, seeing that it involves a demand on the part of the trade for drawback to an extent which it would be quite out of my power to admit, I have come to the conclusion that it will be to their advantage that I should positively say that I do not propose to touch the duty at all.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is contemplated, in the forthcoming Warrant, to apply the same principles which regulate the ratio of pay between effective and non-effective pay in other Departments of the Army to the Veterinary Department?

No, Sir; it is not proposed to make any change in the retired pay of the Veterinary Department. My hon. and gallant Friend is probably aware that the present rate of retired pay for a veterinary surgeon is one-half the rate of full pay of their rank at retirement after 20 years' service, and seven-tenths of the same after 25 years' service. It is not proposed to disturb these rates at present.

asked the Postmaster General, If he will state the cause of the delay in filling up the vacant Con-trollership of Savings Banks, and the reason for transferring a clerk from another office to the Department during the late Controller's recent absence from ill-health?

Sir, in reply to the hon. Member, I may state that during the absence of the late Controller of the Savings Bank from ill-health, I thought the interests of the Service would be promoted by the office being held by Mr. Cardin, who was at the time principal book-keeper in the Receiver and Accountant General's Office. The late Controller, Mr. Ramsay, I regret to say, has recently died, and I have come to the conclusion that it it is desirable that Mr. Cardin should continue in charge of the office. I do not think it would be expedient to come to any decision at present with regard to the arrangements that may be ultimately adopted.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, What progress has been made towards giving effect to the Treaty of Berlin with respect to the annual tribute of Bulgaria, and the portion of the public debt of Turkey assigned to Bulgaria, Montenegro, and Servia; and, what portion of the public debt is to be assigned to Greece?

Sir, Her Majesty's Government have been in consultation with the other signatory Powers with a view to an early settlement of these questions, which are now being dealt with by the Ambassadors at Constantinople; but no agreement has yet been arrived at. The question will continue to engage the serious attention of Her Majesty's Government.

gave Notice that he would call attention to the subject on going into Committee of Supply.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in his Railway Passenger Duty Bill, he will propose to grant exemption from Duty to any season tickets where the single fare exceeds one penny a mile; and, when he proposes to introduce this Bill?

Sir, I stated, in introducing the Budget, that we did not propose to exempt from duty receipts from season tickets based on single fares exceeding Id. a-mile. In urban districts the duty on the receipts from such tickets will be 2 per cent instead of 5 per cent. The Bill will be introduced shortly, but some details are not yet settled with the Board of Trade.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether certain land cases in the neighbourhood of Roscrea, King's County, which wore adjudicated upon by the Land Commission, and appealed against by Lord Ross, the landlord, have been listed for hearing in Mullingar, at a distance of forty miles from the neighbourhood of the tenants; and, whether, considering the poverty of these tenants, he will appeal to the Land Commissioners to change the venue of this appeal to Maryborough, which will be within reach of the tenants, and so enable them to attend the appeals and watch their own interests?

Sir, the Land Commissioners inforn me that there are nine appeals by Lord Ross from the King's County, listed for hearing at Mullingar. They further state that on the application of most of the solicitors engaged in appeals from that county, they have intimidated their readiness to hear such appeals, with the consent of both parties, in Dublin, but they could not make arrangements to hear them at Maryborough.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he would grant to the House a Return of the different qualifications required for the Parliamentary Franchise at present in force in Foreign Countries, and of the proportion borne by the number of the electorate to the population in such countries?

Sir, some information on the point to which my hon. Friend refers is contained in the "Reports on the Practice in certain European Countries in Election Contests," which were laid before Parliament in 1881 and 1882 (C. 2,987, 3,061, 3,159). As, however, it maybe desirable that the House should possess the information in a more convenient form, there will be no objection on the part of the Foreign Office to instruct Her Majesty's Representatives abroad to forward special Reports upon the subject.

asked, whether the noble Lord would also cause Reports to be made of the duration of Parliaments and of the changes of Governments in foreign countries?

Sir, that involves a further Question of which I should be glad to have Notice.

gave Notice, that he would move for a Return giving the desired information.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is the intention of the Treasury to impose increased tolls on the Upper Shannon Navigation, pending the discussion of the Bill to be brought in on the subject of the transfer of the Navigation; when the last increase of tolls took place; and, whether the Canal Company trading on the Upper Shannon has given notice of withdrawing its traffic on account of a proposed increase of tolls?

Sir, there is no intention of raising the scale of tolls at present in force, pending a decision on the question of transfer. The last increase in the tolls was proposed in November, 1881, published in March, 1882, and slightly modified in July last. The Grand Canal Company has threatened to withdraw from the Shannon traffic, but I hope it will not carry out its intention.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, If he will lay upon the Table any Correspondence which has lately occurred between the Canal Company trading on the Upper Shannon and the Treasury and Board of Works, and between the Chamber of Commerce of Limerick and the same Government Departments?

Assuming that the hon. Member refers to the question of the tolls on the River Shannon, I have to say that the correspondence on this subject is still proceeding, and that it would therefore not be to the public advantage that it should be published.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is proposed to establish a special body of police for the prevention of crime against the public safety; and, if so, whether the cost of its maintenance will be defrayed out of the taxes and not out of the rates?

No, Sir; there is no such intention.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that every month reports of London analysts, on the character of London water, purporting to be addressed to him, are widely circulated, although, as stated last year in the House, they are neither authorised nor paid for by the Local Government Board, but are authorised and paid for by the London Water Companies; and, whether, as such a form of report is calculated to mislead the public, and to give an appearance of official authenticity which is not consistent with fact, he will either decline to receive any more of such reports, or require their form to be modified?

Sir, as was stated last year by my right lion. Friend, these Reports are not made under the authority of the Local Government Board. It must, therefore, be presumed they are made on behalf of, and at the expense of, the Water Companies. I agree with my hon. Friend in thinking that such Reports, purporting to be addressed to the President of the Local Government Board, are misleading, and I should expect that after this expression of opinion they would be discontinued.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, before the Cabinet decided on proposing to this House the Resolution of the 1st of July, 1880, the Law Officers and the Lord Chancellor had considered the accuracy of the opinion subsequently expressed by the Solicitor General during the Debate, to the following effect:—

"A doubt has been suggested whether a Court of Law could decide this question. Ho was unable to understand how such a doubt existed. He asserted, with the utmost confidence, that if Mr. Bradlaugh were sued for penalties, no Resolution of the House could for a moment stand in the way of those proceedings. It was said, 'once get Mr. Bradlaugh into the House, and no one will sue him for penalties.' Those who said so must have very little confidence in their view of the Law. Did they really believe that no one would speculate upon their Law with £500 as a prize;"

This Question divides itself into several parts, and I will give the answer to these parts in succession and briefly. In the first place, neither the Cabinet, nor the Lord Chancellor, nor the Law Officers, before proposing the Standing Order of July 1st, 1880, considered it any part of their duty to examine the subject in respect to what would follow from a breach of the law, or attempted breach of the law. In the second place, in regard to the opinion subsequently expressed by my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor General, that opinion was not the result of any formal reference to the Law Officers of the Crown; and he only gave expression to the opinion that an informer could sue, which was very widely prevalent in the Profession, and was subsequently confirmed by the judgment of two Courts of Law, although reversed by the House of Lords. In the next place, there was no instruction to the Attorney General to institute proceedings against Mr. Bradlaugh; nor, in truth, was there any opportunity for that question to be considered, because immediately after the voting—absolutely within an hour or two hours of the voting of the hon. Member—proceedings were taken by a private person. With regard to the last part of the Question, it is not usual for a Judge to sit judicially upon a question on which he had given his advice as a Minister, nor has it occurred in the present instance at all, because the Lord Chancellor has never given us advice on the matter, inasmuch as the matter had not been taken into consideration by the Cabinet or the Lord Chancellor beforehand.

asked, if they were to understand that the Motion made by the right hon. Gentleman in proposing the Standing Order on the 1st of July, 1880, was made by him to the House without having been previously submitted to the Cabinet?

Sir, the question which I said was not considered in anticipation by the Cabinet was, whether, if any presumptive cause for proceedings at law should arise, the state of the law was to be presumed this way or that, or proceedings were to be taken by the Cabinet?

asked the Prime Minister, whether, in consequence of the decision of the House of Lords in the case of "Bradlaugh v. Clarke," he correctly understood the right hon. Gentleman, on the previous Thursday, to state that it was not his intention to direct the Attorney General to institute proceedings against Mr. Bradlaugh for having sat and having voted in the House on the 22nd of February, 1882, or on any other occasion?

I would rather not be understood to be bound by the date quoted by the hon. Gentleman, because my impression is that that is not the exact date.

If the right hon. Gentleman will refer to Hansard, he will find that the Speaker called the attention of the House to the fact that the hon. Member was sitting in the House, after he had been ordered to withdraw on the 7th of February; and he will also find appended to the Division List a note to the effect that the Speaker called the attention of the House to the fact that Mr. Bradlaugh had voted, but no proceedings were taken by the House thereon.

The Question now put by the hon. Member for North Warwickshire refers to a different matter from the Question of the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff); and I had better, to avoid the risk of misunderstanding, ask him to put it on the Paper.

I wish to ask whether the present Lord Chancellor, when Attorney General in 1866, at the time the Parliamentary Oaths Bill was brought forward by the then Government, did not inform the House that henceforward action under that Bill could only be taken by the Attorney General; and whether, as a Member of the Cabinet, he was not responsible for the Resolution of July 1st, 1880, and for the reason then given by the Solicitor General, on behalf of the Government, for the adoption of the said Resolution?

There can be no doubt that my noble Friend is responsible with us for that proposal made for the Government in 1880; but with regard to the declaration made by him in 1866, as I have not the matter fresh in my mind, perhaps it would be better that that Question should also be put on the Notice Paper.

Are we to understand that when the Government pressed the House to pass a Resolution which invited Mr. Bradlaugh to affirm, they had not considered, by seeking the advice either of the Lord Chancellor, or of the Law Officers of the Crown, whether, if Mr. Bradlaugh complied with the Resolution, he would not render himself liable to an action brought against him by the Attorney General under the Statute?

As the Question relates to a matter of law, it would be better that Notice of it should be given.

I wish to ask whether the Government repudiate the plea on which the House was invited to pass the Resolution of the Solicitor General?

I may now say that I cannot answer the Question without taking exception to its terms, because they do not represent the issue before the House at the time.

I will repeat the Question to-morrow.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether his attention has been called to a letter addressed to the "Times" of the 6th April by Sir Lepel Griffin, entitled "Liberal Policy in Afghanistan," and which contains the following paragraph:—

"Our obvious interests demand the early construction of a broad gauge railway to Quetta, and the enlargement and strengthening of that important position, so as to enable it to command Candahar and the surrounding districts. The Ameer whom we placed on the throne in August 1880 is no more friendly than his predecessors were, and Russian intrigue is as unceasing and audacious to-day in Afghanistan as it was in the days of Shere Ali;"

"The person chiefly concerned with the political arrangements in that country, under Both the late and present Administrations?"

In answer to the hon. Gentleman, I have to say that Her Majesty's Government do not in any manner adopt the statement in the passage quoted by the hon. Member, and have not arrived at any decision to extend the railway in question.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, On what day he can give facilities for discussing the question of the release of the Cuban refugees?

, in reply, said, that, looking to the limited fund of time at the disposal of the Government, ho must make the best arrangements he could; and he did not conceive the subject to be one so urgent as to lead him to put aside any of the Business that stood more immediately for consideration. He should be happy, however, to communicate with the right hon. Gentleman, because, although he could not see his way to an immediate discussion, he should be very sorry indeed to contemplate any unreasonable delay.

asked the Prime Minister whether he could name any day for the resumption of the debate on the Transvaal?

, in reply, said, that he was not in a position as yet to deal with this subject at all, because, as he had before stated, until the issue was simplified, the matter did not come before them in such a state as that they could have a reasonable expectation of getting through it. He had been in the hope of hearing that some change would take place with regard to the issue to be presented to the House, for a series of issues such as stood on the Paper they were not prepared to deal with by making an arrangement that would interfere with the progress of Government Business. He made that a condition and preliminary to giving a definite answer to the right hon. Gentleman's inquiry. With regard to the Business to-night, the House would understand that they would first proceed with the consideration of the Queen's Message with respect to Lord Alcester and Lord Wolseley, upon which he did not believe that there would be any lengthened discussion. When he proposed the second reading of the Bill on the subject, which he would do on Thursday, then his hon. Friend the Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere) would have an opportunity of raising any question he might think proper. After the Queen's Message had been disposed of they would go on with the proposal to refer the Criminal Code Bill to the Standing Committee, and would then proceed with the Patents for Inventions Bill. On Thursday, after the Business already mentioned was disposed of, the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Tax Bill would be taken. As to the second reading of the Affirmation Bill, they wished to propose that that should be taken on that day week.

bogged to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether there was any truth in the report that Her Majesty's Dominions had been extended by the occupation of New Guinea by the Queensland Government?

Sir, all the information Her Majesty's Government have was received to-day, in reply to a telegram sent on Saturday to the Governor of Queensland, in consequence of the report which appeared in the newspapers. The Governor telegraphed as follows: —

"To prevent Foreign Powers from taking possession of New Guinea, the Queensland Government, through the police magistrate of Thursday Island, took formal possession in Her Majesty's name on the 4th instant, pending the decision of the Government on my despatch just gone this mail."

asked whether the action of the Queensland Government in taking possession of New Zealand—[Laughter]—he meant New Guinea, was the action of Her Majesty's Governor of Queensland; and, if so, whether that action of the Governor was authorized or sanctioned by Her Majesty's Government?

The Question answers itself. I have given the House the whole information we possess.

begged to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether the Government have arrived at any decision with regard to the Irish Mail Contract?

Sir, in reply to my hon. Friend, I have to say that we have decided not to propose to Parliament the confirmation of the Contract for the conveyance of the Dublin Mail made with the London and North-Western Railway Company. Before arriving at that decision we communicated with the Board of Directors of that Company, who, when informed of our reasons for not thinking that the Contact should be confirmed, at once stated that they had no wish that the House of Commons should be asked to ratify it. Indeed, nothing could be more straightforward and honourable than the conduct of the London and Northwestern Railway Company throughout the negotiations with them. Without going into details, I may say that the reason which has mainly actuated us in arriving at this decision is the importance of making provision in the Contract for the accommodation of passengers, as provided in the Treasury Minute of 1855. We shall, therefore, at once call for fresh tenders for a service providing satisfactory passenger accommodation as well as the most efficient postal arrangements.

gave Notice that he would, on Thursday, ask the First Commissioner of Works, whether he did not consider that Westminster Hall would be much improved by the removal of the statues now standing there on wooden pedestals?

said, that he expected the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill would be circulated to-morrow. It would provide that the gun licences in force up to April should continue in force up to July, after which the new gun licences would be issued in the form prescribed.

asked whether they were to understand that the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill would contain no alteration of the silver plate duty?

, in reply, said, that he had already stated that it would not.

said, that there was no intention of interfering with the duty at all. In fact, he had not proposed to interfere with the duty, except to allow its payment to be postponed until the articles went into consumption.

subsequently asked if it was to be distinctly understood that it was not the intention of the Government, either now or at a future time, to propose to repeal the duty?

, in reply, said, he could not speak for the future. But, as he had already said, there was no present intention to interfere with the duty at all.

said, it had been laid down by Sir Lepel Griffin that the Ameer, whom we placed on the Throne of Afghanistan in August, 1880, was no more friendly than his Predecessors, and that Russian intrigue was as unceasing and audacious to-day in Afghanistan as it was in the days of Shere Ali. Could the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister confirm that statement?

I have already stated very succinctly that Her Majesty's Government do not adopt the view of Sir Lepel Griffin.

said, that he was not in a position to state when the Bill would be read a second time; but due Notice would be given.