asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he will endeavour to arrange with the Admiralty to place at the disposal of the Fishery Commissioners during the summer a suitable vessel, with the necessary apparatus, in order to determine whether a valuable bank of fish exists in the west of Ireland near to Clifden and the adjacent islands?

Without further information on the subject than the Government have been able to obtain since this Question was put on the Paper, they are unable to give any undertaking in the souse desired by the hon. Member.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the Government will endeavour to obtain further information, or am I to accept his answer as a declaration that the Government prefers that the starving inhabitants of the West shall be eaten up by the fish rather than that the fish shall supply food for them?

The hon. Member generalizes a good deal too much. He asks whether, at a particular point of the Irish coast, more than at any other point, the Government, without any other authority, will send a ship? That is a Question which demands a good deal of consideration, which I think is not unreasonable. If a ship were sent to every point that the hon. Member suggests without examination on that coast it is obvious that great and unnecessary expense would be incurred.

I fear I have not made my Question intelligible to the right hon. Gentleman. I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in a par- titular district in which there is chronic destitution and famine, and as to which it has been reported by the Fishery Commissioners that there are extensive banks of fish, Her Majesty's Government will take means to inquire into the existence of such banks of fish?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is not a fact that the Crown now possesses the power to purchase by agreement fuel rights in the New Forest; whether it is essential to the public interest to retain the Clauses in the Crown Lands Bill which make it compulsory on the owners of fuel to sell them to the Crown; and, having regard to the fact that the evidence of such owners of fuel rights as have petitioned Parliament against these Clauses was not heard by the Select Committee to which the Crown Lands Bill was referred, he will consent to withdraw Clauses 7 and 8 in that Bill?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the present owners of fuel rights have never been invited by the Crown to sell them by agreement, under its general powers of purchase conferred upon it by the Act 10 Geo. 4, cap. 50; whether the fuel rights, like the other common rights in the New Forest, extend over the entire forest, with the temporary exception of such lands as may be from time to time enclosed within temporary fences for the growth and preservation of young timber, under the Acts of 1698, 1808, and 1851, and not yet thrown open, and whether the woodland available for the supply of the fuel rights at the present time (adopting the estimate made by the Hon. J. K. Howard, late Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests, in his special report presented to Parliament in 1871, and subsequently, by order of the House, reprinted in 1875), amounts from 13,500 to 14,000 acres; and, whether the owners and the exercisers of the fuel rights, who are entitled to about 344 out of a total of 406 loads of wood from the New Forest, and who have petitioned against sections 7 and 8 of the Crown Lands Bill, have pledged their "local experience" that the fuel rights have always been satisfied, and may continue to be satisfied, without the sacrifice of any ornamental timber?

I will answer my hon. Friend the Member for Gateshead at the same time as the noble Lord. The Crown can now purchase the fuel rights by agreement, and although they have not sent a Circular distinctly inviting sales, the fact is generally known by those interested, With respect to the case of the owners, although due notice was given, and ample opportunity for petitioning, the hostile owners did not see fit to appear before the Committee at the proper time; but, notwithstanding this, the Committee gave them an opportunity of making a statement, which, however, did Hot modify its decision. It is very desirable to get rid of these rights, because, as the Commissioner of Woods says, and the Select Committee agreed, before long there might not be timber to satisfy thorn. They are confined to the uninclosed parts of the Forest; and these, after deducting the 16,000 acres which the Crown is entitled to reserve, amount to only 6,169 acres of timber, of which 4,500 may be described as "ornamental and ancient woods." Thus there is now little available to supply the annual demand, which is equivalent to about 320 large trees; and it may soon be necessary to reduce the assignment of fuel to half rations. Some local people have asserted that no injury would be caused by the continuance of those rights; but they are probably not aware that they do not extend to the Crown reserves. Under those circumstances, I am not at present prepared to withdraw the compulsory clauses.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to the proposal of the Belfast Guardians of the 29th ultimo, to erect a new detached dwelling house for the present workhouse master, at a cost of £600 or £700; is said proposed house outside workhouse grounds; if it be true that the master was only appointed about two years ago, and since this time upwards of £200 have boon expended in general improvements to, and furniture for, his apartments, in addition to the furniture pre viously purchased for them; is it true that this expenditure was incurred in order to accommodate the master's wife and family, who are maintained out of the rates; are these apartments the same as those occupied by all previous masters; and, will he undertake to have this proposal of the guardians set aside on the ground that the expenditure is unnecessary?

, in reply, said, he had already partly answered this Question. In consequence of the master's apartments having been condemned as unhealthy and unfit to live in, the Guardians had resolved to erect a dwelling-house for him, at a cost not to exceed £400. No site had been selected; but it was understood that the proposal was to build the house within the workhouse grounds, near the main entrance. The Local Government Board would not approve of a site outside the grounds. The present master was appointed in February, 1881, since which time £78 had been spent in furnishing his rooms, which contained hardly any furniture at the time of his appointment. They were the same rooms as those occupied by his immediate predecessor; but former masters had other accommodation which was not now available. The late master lived alone in the workhouse. The present master's wife and family resided with him. It was not the case, however, that they were supported out of the rates, and he did not quite understand that part of the Question. The whole matter was still before the Guardians, and he understood that notice had been given to rescind the resolution to build the house.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he will withhold his sanction for the Metropolitan Asylum Board to erect a Small Pox Hospital for Convalescents, and for patients suffering from the disease in a mild form, at Darenth, near Dartford, Kent; and, whether he is aware that such Hospital would, if erected, be in a large residential locality, and also in close proximity to the following institutions:—The City of London Asylum for Imbeciles; the Kent Penitentiary; the St. Vincent Industrial Schools; and the Metropolitan District Asylum?

My right hon. Friend (Sir Charles W. Dilke) has requested me to answer this Question. The Board, after full consideration of the circumstances, expressed their general approval of the proposal of the managers of the Asylum District to purchase 130 acres of land at Darenth for the purpose of the erection of a hospital; and the Board are aware of no sufficient reason for withholding their formal sanction to the purchase. The information before the Board does not support the statement that the hospital, if erected, would be in the midst of a large residential locality; and, with regard to the Institutions which it is stated would be in close proximity to the hospital, the Kent Penitentiary is about three-quarters of a mile from the land on which the hospital is proposed to be erected; the City of London Pauper Lunatic Asylum about a mile and a quarter; and the St. Vincent Industrial Schools at a distance of about two miles. The Metropolitan District Asylum is nearer; but there will be a largo bolt of land separating the two Institutions, and it is to be observed that both will be under the same Board of Managers.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he has declined to receive a deputation of Metropolitan Guardians, representing a conference of the guardians of the metropolis in reference to a scheme for the care and maintenance of persons suffering from infectious diseases in the metropolis, upon the ground that such scheme would be an entire reversal of the present arrangements which have been in force for the past sixteen years?

The Board have had communicated to them a scheme for the care and maintenance of cases of infectious disease in the Metropolis, which was ordered to be prepared at a conference of Guardians, and they were asked to receive a deputation on the subject. The scheme contemplates that the 30 Metropolitan Boards of Guardians should be empowered to deal with pauper cases "each union in its own locality" that non-pauper cases should be referred to the sanitary authorities; and that those authorities also should provide hospital accommodation. The Metropolitan Asylum Board was constituted in consequence of no adequate provision having been made by Boards of Guardians for cases of infectious disease, and the great difficulty which attended the provision of such accommodation in each union and parish. The Board believes that independently of the expense which the establishment of so large a number of hospitals, each with its own staff of officers, would involve, it would, in the case of many Unions—such, for instance, as the Strand and Westminster—be almost impossible for the Cuardians to obtain suitable sites within the Unions for small-pox cases. Not a single Board of Guardians in the Metropolis, so far as the Board are aware, has as yet expressed its concurrence in this scheme; and it appeared to the Board that there would be no advantage in receiving the proposed deputation.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is true that the Captain of the Port of Carthagena, who was ostensibly dismissed from his office in deference to British remonstrances regarding his armed attack upon the steamer "Tangier," has, as stated in the "Shipping Gazette" of May 29th, "since been promoted to the better Port of Cadiz?"

No, Sir; it is not true.

asked the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it has come to his knowledge that serious complaints have been made of the appointment of James Addison, as sub-postmaster at Ardley, in Oxford-shire; and, whether he will cause inquiry to be instituted into the truth of allegations which, if substantiated, would cast discredit upon the appointment?

, in reply, said, that serious complaints had been made as to the appointment in question. Inquiries had been instituted, and there appeared to be some foundation for them; but the facts were not such as to disqualify the person appointed. Moreover, a Memorial, numerously and influentially signed, had been received in his favour from the inhabitants of the district.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, What are the regulations at present in force with respect to the importation of cattle from France; and, whether, in view of the prevalence of foot and mouth disease in France at the present time, the Government will continue for some months longer the order issued on the 6th of April 1883, prohibiting the landing in this Country of animals from France?

, in reply, said, that an Order was passed on the 28th of March prohibiting the importation of animals from France, and that Order had been renewed at various dates and extended now to July 6th, so that it was still in force. The French Government were taking very energetic measures to prevent the exportation of disease; but it was too early yet to decide whether it would be advisable to allow the prohibition to drop on July 6, or whether it would be necessary to renew it again for a limited period.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a Copy of the Despatch of the Governor of Ceylon upon the question of the allowance which, in his judgment, was requisite for the Egyptian exiles in Ceylon?

I stated on Monday, in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere), that communications on this subject are still proceeding; and, pending a settlement, I cannot give any undertaking as to the publication of the despatch of the Governor of Ceylon.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether his attention has been called to a letter from the secretary of the Abori- gines' Protection Society, published in The Daily News of June 9th, which contains an extract from a letter of Cetewayo to the Bishop of Natal, dated April 15th, in which Cetewayo announces his intention of summoning his people to arms, and requests permission from the Lieutenant Governor of Natal to allow him also to obtain assistance from the Zulus in the reserved territory; and, whether, having regard to the fact that in the same letter Cetewayo himself expresses his opinion that under the present scheme of restoration "Blood will never cease," and that "the country is going to ruin," and having regard also to the statement made by Sir Henry Bulwer, in his official report of February 15th, that Cetewayo "had scarcely landed in Zululand before he began to break the conditions" under which ho was restored, the Government will re - consider the advisability of placing the whole country and its present chieftains, including Cetewayo, under the supreme authority of a British Resident, by extending to the whole of Zululand the efficient and self-supporting system of Government now adopted in the Zulu Native Reserve? The hon. Member had a second Question on the Paper, referring to the charges of misrepresentation made by Sir Henry Bulwer against the Natal Correspondent of The Daily News, the asking of which he postponed, understanding that that Correspondent had addressed some communication to the Colonial Office in reply to Sir Henry Bulwer's charges.

With reference to the remarks just made by the hon. Member, I must offer a correction. The communication to which he refers has not yet been received at the Colonial Office; but we have been informed that it will arrive. If the hon. Member will allow me to say it, I would point out that his Question is somewhat unusual, as being an argumentative statement of what are his views as to the policy which the Government ought to pursue, rather than a question as to facts. However, I will say, in. reply, that "the system of government adopted for the Zulu Native Reserve," was devised in order to enable the Government to keep faith by securing a place of refuge for any Chiefs or people who might be unwilling to come again under Cetewayo, but this consideration would not apply to the rest of Zululand; and, as we have never ac- knowledged, or assumed, any Protectorate over that country, the Government are not at present prepared to adopt the views advocated by the hon. Member.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, To state under what circumstances Captain I. W. Otley, R.E. was appointed (see Government of India Gazette notification, No. 106, dated 28th April 1883) a superintending engineer, 3rd grade, in the Public Works Department, in supersedure of twenty civil engineers of greater seniority; and, if Her Majesty's Government approve of the action of the military heads of the department in India filling almost all the administrative posts in the public works with officers of Royal Engineers; also under what particular circumstances Lieutenant G. K. Scott Moncrieff, R.E. Assistant Engineer, 1st Grade, Indian Public Works Department, was appointed (see "Gazette of India," 9th May 1883) a Deputy Consulting Engineer for Guaranteed Railways, in supersedure of twenty-seven senior officers, nine of whom were 2nd Grade Assistant Engineers for one and a-half years before Lieutenant G. K. Scott Moncrieff, R.E. entered the Public Works Department; also to state what experience on Railways Lieutenant Scott Moncrieff, R.E. has had which renders him a proper officer to be consulted on Railway matters; and, to inquire whether Her Majesty's Government approves of the appointment of Military Officers, without experience, to such posts, at a time when economy might be effected by employing some of the many duly qualified Civil Engineers in the Department, who are senior to Lieutenant Scott Moncrieff, R.E.?

The Government of India do not furnish the India Office with particulars respecting appointments such as those referred to in the Question of my hon. Friend. I am unable to state what reason there may have been for the appointment of Lieutenant Scott Moncrieff. Such appointments are not made by "the military heads of the Department," as my hon. Friend seems to suppose, but by the Government of India, who, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, may be relied on to make a fit choice of officers for particular posts.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he concurs in the view taken by the Army Hospital Services Inquiry Committee in their report with reference to the scope of the inquiry; and, whether, since such limitation of the inquiry is not in accordance with the strongly expressed demand of the House and the Country last October for a thorough and searching inquiry as to the complaints made against the Medical and Hospital Services in Egypt, as well as against those responsible for the supply of Stores and Transport Contracts in connection with the hospitals; what further inquiry he proposes with reference to those officers of high rank who are charged with declining to assume the responsibilities of their position, and to undertake any initiative themselves in order to supply the wants or alleviate the sufferings of the sick and wounded; also in respect of the responsibility and blame which is stated to rest on Lieut.-General Sir John Adye and Deputy Surgeon General Sir J. Hanbury, for permitting such a state of things to exist in Egypt as that described in Lord Wolseley's evidence without, as is alleged, any attempt on their part to remedy the hospital deficiencies?

The limitation of the scope of the inquiry of which my hon. Friend complains is, I presume, that which is referred to in the 99th paragraph of the Report, in which the Committee state—

"It is not contemplated in our instructions that we should in any sense perform the functions of a Court of Inquiry into the conduct of individuals."

asked the Secretary of State for War, Under whose authority, and for what purpose, soldiers are engaged in doing daily duty at the Law Courts; and, whether he has had any intimation from the judges that they need a military guard?

Soldiers have been employed on sentry duty at the Law Courts on my authority, for the purpose of assisting the police in the protection of the buildings. I have not had any intimation from the Judges in the matter; but the sentries were furnished on the request of the Secretary of State for the Home Department. I may add that the police arrangements having now been sufficiently advanced, the sentries have been withdrawn.

asked the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works, Whether, considering all the circumstances, the Metropolitan Board of Works will withdraw their prohibition to public meetings on Peckham Rye?

The bye-law relating to public meetings on Peckham Rye is under consideration by a Committee of the Board; but I am unable to inform the hon. Member what decision may be come to.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, seeing that the sum of £2,500 is set out in the Estimates as the salary of the Consul General in Egypt, it is the intention of the Treasury to authorize a higher payment to an officer holding that position without submitting a Supplementary Estimate to Parliament?

also asked, Whether the remuneration to be given to Major Baring, on account of his transfer from India to Egypt, is to be a charge on the Imperial or Indian Exchequer; what is the amount of the proposed remuneration; and, whether a Vote on this account is to be asked for?

It is intended to propose that the salary of the Consul General in Egypt shall be £4,000 a-year; and a personal allowance will be granted to Major Baring, not to be continued to his successor. The amount of this allowance has not been settled; but neither it nor any part of the salary will be a charge on the Indian Exchequer. I do not find that it has been usual to propose a Supplementary Estimate in respect of the increase of an individual salary, after the Vote has passed, if the aggregate Vote is not exceeded; but, however that may be, in this case the Vote has not passed, and an amended Estimate will be laid on the Table, showing the new salary and personal allowance, on which any Amendment may be proposed.

I presume the allowance is to be made to Major Baring because of the differences of the salary of the office he holds now to that which he will receive as Consul General?

That question will be raised on the Vote when it is proposed.

What is Major Baring's salary now?

Speaking from memory, the salary of the Member of the Council of India who has control of the Treasury Department is 6,600 rupees a-month. The equivalent of that in our money depends on the rate of exchange.

I presume the right hon. Gentleman will give ample Notice before the Vote is taken.

Certainly; ample Notice will be given.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the fact that the inquiry ordered by the Local Government Board into the conduct of the returning officer at the recent election of Poor Law guardians for the division of Greenan, in the union of Omagh, has been postponed by the inspector, Mr. Armstrong, for the convenience of the Conservative guardian who was declared elected; whether the intended postponement was only communicated to the persons impugning the election on the previous day, and was followed by a second communication, intimating that Mr. Armstrong would sit as originally arranged; whether he is aware that, on the faith of the latter announcement, they at great expense and inconvenience brought their solicitor and witnesses into Omagh on the day named, when the returning officer, whose conduct alone was in question, was also in attendance; whether no evidence was in fact taken; and, whether, in view of Mr. Armstrong's local associations, the Local Government Board will take steps to have the inquiry speedily conducted by an officer unconnected with the locality?

The right of Mr. William Deazley to act as Guardian was questioned by Mr. Joseph Slevin on the alleged ground that he had not obtained a majority of valid votes. This was the matter which the Inspector, Mr. Armstrong, was directed to inquire into. The circumstances connected with the postponement are explained in the following telegram received from Mr. Armstrong:—

"I fixed 7th instant for inquiry. On previous day I heard from Deazley that he had gone to Donegal on urgent business and could not attend. I at once wired to Mr. Slevin that I must postpone. Ho wired back protesting. I answered I would attend and hear what was to be said. I opened inquiry and adjourned it until 21st, as I did not think it right to proceed without Deazley. I took no evidence. No doubt solicitor and several witnesses attended; but I think that was owing to Slevin not understanding second telegram."

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any communications passing between Mr. Errington and the Foreign Office will be printed for the information of the House?

No, Sir; it is not intended to do so.

Might I ask whether the noble Lord thinks that it is a satisfactory state of things that the people of England and of Ireland should be left dependent upon interviews with the correspondent of The New York Herald for information as to what has passed on this matter?

The hon. Member is now asking the noble Lord for his opinion, which is not regular in a Question.

asked the Vice President of the Council, If it is the fact that the Charity Commissioners have for some time past withheld from the Trustees of the Griffith Amerideth Exeter Charity the dividends from Stock invested in the names of the Official Trustees of that Charity; and, if so, under what statute, and with what ultimate intention, have the Charity Commissioners thus acted?

It appears that in 1556 the Founder of this Charity bequeathed the profits of his lands for the purchase of shrouds for prisoners who should suffer death in the city of Exeter. By orders of the Court of Chancery and of the Charity Commissioners, the trust is now administered by municipal trustees, the Stock being held by "the official trustees of charitable funds." The demand for shrouds having happily declined, the income has been applied, without authority, to the purchase of petticoats for old women. The Commissioners have repeatedly suggested to the trustees that they ought to apply for a scheme for the legitimate distribution of the funds; but the trustees have positively refused compliance. The Commissioners, accordingly, under their general powers conferred by Statute, have directed the official trustees to retain the dividends, and they have since received an application from the Home Secretary for a scheme under the Prisons Acts, which will provide for the disposal of the funds for the benefit of discharged prisoners.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether, under the Army Regulations, adequate provision is made for the regular visitation of hospitals by responsible officers other than those belonging to the Medical Staff whilst the Army is in the field; and, if not, whether Her Majesty's Government will cause such provision to be made?

The Queen's Regulations explicitly hold General Officers responsible for seeing that hospitals are frequently visited, either by themselves, or by other officers under their direction.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether his attention has been called to a letter published in the "Daily News" of the 11th instant, headed "Freebooters in Bechuanaland," in which it is alleged that a boundary has been beaconed out by freebooters that would enable them to stop British trade with the natives of the interior; and, if the statement be true, what steps the Government will take to protect British interests?

We have no official information of a boundary having been beaconed out by freebooters in Bechuanaland; but it would appear, by looking at the map, that the roads to the interior must pass through the territory which has been lately occupied by them. However, this question of trade concerns more immediately the Cape Government; and we shall await till we hear from them in order to concert with them what action should be taken in view of any stoppage of trade.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether his attention has been called to the continuance of disturbances in British Sherbro, and especially to Reuter's telegram reporting the roasting alive of fifty persons charged with witch- craft; and, if he is able to say whether the persons thus said to have been murdered were slaves, prisoners of war, or British subjects; and, what steps Her Majesty's Government intend to take to re-establish British authority in the Country?

No Report has been received at the Colonial Office as to the alleged roasting alive of persons in British Sherbro. And as to the disturbances generally, I may say that, having consulted Mr. Havelock, the Governor of Sierra Leone, who happens at present to be at home, I think that the rumours and statements which have arrived are certainly exaggerated. We know, however, that Mr. Pinkett, the officer administering the Government, has arrived at the disturbed district with an adequate force of police and troops, and I hope that next mail may bring us news of the entire re-establishment of order.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is true that the number of police allowed for the Kilmallock Station, according to regulation order, is insufficient for the ordinary duties of that district; and, if it is the fact that the additional number of men required to perform such duties have been sent there under the provisions of the Crimes Act, and the cost of the same charged to the ratepayers of that district?

The regular police force allowed for the Kilmallock Station is sufficient for the ordinary duties of the district. The additional force quartered there under the Crimes Act, and for which the inhabitants have to pay, is required for a special purpose, which I have already more than once stated in reply to former Questions.

May I ask what are the special duties in the town of Kilmallock for which an extra force of police is required?

I am very unwilling to be discourteous to the hon. Member; but I explained the matter very fully the last time I was questioned about it. There is an extremely perilous case for which some people in Kilmallock are of opinion the authorities are responsible.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he is able to confirm the statements which have appeared in the public Press respecting the negotiation of a Treaty of Commerce with Italy for a term of years?

The terms of a new Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Great Britain and Italy have been agreed upon, and the Treaty will be signed forthwith. It will closely resemble the Treaty now in force, which expires on the 30th instant; and its general effect will be to secure to Great Britain absolute and unconditional "most favoured nation" treatment. The coasting trade in Italy will, however, be no longer guaranteed to British subjects on the same terms as to Natives. The Treaty will contain a stipulation reserving the power to the self-governing British Colonies to accede to the Treaty in case they desire to do so; and a separate Instrument will be signed agreeing to refer to arbitration any questions arising under the new Treaty, which cannot be settled by correspondence between the two Governments. The Treaty will not be terminable, at the earliest, until the 1st of January, 1888, and, unless then denounced, will remain in force until 1892.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether in the recent notices posted in the Metropolitan district offices for second class sorters to apply for transfer to the General Post Office, it is intended that they shall carry their seniority with them?

In reply to my hon. Friend, I have to state that on transfer to the General Post Office the sorters of the Metropolitan District will rank below those who are sorters there already; but that relatively among themselves they will rank according to seniority, and will carry with them their present pay.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, What was the precise charge on which Mr. Banerjea was removed from the Indian Civil Service?

Mr. Banerjea, as Assistant Magistrate, had to submit periodically a record of the state of business in his Court. In order to prevent this record showing the extent of the arrears into which, through sheer neglect of duty, he had allowed the cause list to fall, he was guilty, in the words of the Governor General in Council (the Earl of Northbrook), of "dishonest fabrication of his judicial records;" of "palpable abuse of his judicial powers;" and of "the infliction of injustice upon innocent persons." In other words, he had grossly neglected his duty, and excused himself by repeated prevarications. The charges against Mr. Banerjea were investigated by a Special Commission, appointed for the purpose, under Act 37 of 1850. The Commissioners were unanimous in finding him guilty, and the Viceroy concurred in their decision. The charges are 14 in number, referring, for the most part, to a single case. They are so lengthy, complicated, and technical that nothing would be gained by giving them in detail. But I shall be happy to show the Papers to any hon. Member who may wish to see them.

asked how many Natives were on the Commission?

asked whether Mr. Banerjea had not always maintained that the evidence against him had been misrepresented by the Court; and whether it was Rot the fact that he had been raised to the position of honorary magistrate by Mr. Rivers-Thompson, the present Lieutenant Governor of Bengal, although that gentleman was opposed to the Native Jurisdiction Bill?

said, that Mr. Banerjea had been appointed an honorary magistrate because he had achieved considerable municipal distinction in Calcutta, and the general practice was to appoint to honorary magistracies people who had attained that position. He was not in a position to answer the first portion of the Question.

asked whether it was in accordance with the rules of the Government of India to place a man who had been found guilty of fraudulent conduct in the position of an honorary magistrate?

asked the hon. Member to give Notice of the Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ire. land, Whether any opportunity will be given for discussing the new Rule relating to the visits of untried prisoners before the expiry of the 40 days required by Law for it to lie upon the Table of the House?

It is not usual for the Government to assist private Members in finding an opportunity to discuss Rules or Schemes that lie on the Table of the House. I remember myself often balloting by certain methods for opportunities to discuss matters on Tuesdays and Fridays, and staying up a whole month for the chance generally of being able to speak at half-past 2 o'clock in the morning. Of course, there are occasions on which the Government may willingly assist private Members, and perhaps they have done so. I do not know that Notice is on the Paper with regard to this Rule in the past month; but, in any case, I do not think that the circumstances of Public Business are such as to enable the Government to assist in obtaining an opportunity for the discussion.

I wish to know whether the Prisons Act does not require that when a special Rule is made by the Lord Lieutenant it shall lie on the Table of the House for 40 days before it comes into operation; and I wish also to ask whether this Rule was not put in force by the Lord Lieutenant, although the number of days required by the law had not expired?

Sir, I have already publicly stated during the Session that this Rule has been put in force by the Lord Lieutenant, under what was considered by his advisers a special emergency. The steps which are foreshadowed in the Rule were put in force, though whether the 40 days had expired I cannot say. I stated in the House, in a debate, that the steps which will henceforth be taken under this Rule were taken in January last.

If the Lord Lieutenant can legally act without this new Rule, what is the object of it?

asked the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works, Whether he is aware that the heavy traffic over Putney Bridge is shaking it rapidly to pieces; whether there is any ground for the opinion recently given by architects and other competent persons to the last Vestry meeting of Putney, that the old bridge will not last till the new one is ready; and, what the Board propose to do in order to avert impending accident?

I think the hon. Member rather overrates the effect of heavy traffic on Putney Bridge. The Bridge has for many years been maintained by the removal, from time to time, of decayed timbers and the substitution of sound ones in their place; and this process of renewal is still going on, under careful supervision, so that the Bridge will be made to last until the new Bridge is completed.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, When the Transvaal Papers, which he stated on May 31 would be produced very shortly, will be laid before the House?

If the hon. Member will refer to The Times ho will see that what I said was that—

"I cannot quite tell when the Papers will be laid before the House; but they are being prepared."

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, How many rounds with full charges were fired from the 43-ton gun, now placed on board the Conqueror at Chatham, before she was accepted by the Admiralty?

As the right hon. Gentleman's Question refers to a subject which belongs to the Department of the War Office for which I am responsible, my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty has requested me to reply to it. The number of proof rounds laid down for 43-ton guns was one round battering charge, and five rounds with charges that would increase the pressure of the first charge 25 per cent. These rounds were fired from the 43-ton gun now on board the Conqueror, and besides these five additional rounds were fired with varying charges.

asked the Secretary of State -for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to the destruction by fire of the Gaiety Theatre, Manchester; if it is a fact that—

"The building consisted entirely of a woodwork frame covered with a roof of tarred canvas;"

, in reply, said, what the hon. Member stated in the Question was correct. The building had been duly licensed by the Justices as a music-hall, who satisfied themselves that the means of exit were sufficient. As regarded the control of these buildings, he was informed that the Corporation of Manchester had a Bill before Parliament last year in which there was a very good clause giving them power to call on the proprietors to secure the safety of this class of building. The Select Committee before whom the Bill went struck out that clause; and, therefore, the Corporation were not responsible for what had occurred.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, If the Government has received any communication from Melbourne or Sydney respecting the proposed annexation of groups of islands in the Pacific to the Colonies of Victoria or New South Wales?

Short telegrams have been received, not—

"Proposing annexation of groups of islands in the Pacific to the Colonies of Victoria and New South Wales,"

asked whether the Government had received any information to the effect that some of these Australian Colonies had lately been ordering gunboats from a Newcastle firm?

said, the Government had received no such information.

asked whether the telegrams would be laid on the Table?

said, that it would not be courteous to the Colonies concerned to lay these telegrams on the Table until an answer had been given to them.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that 410 applications for outdoor relief for nearly 2,000 souls were made on Monday at the Bunbeg Dispensary, in the Dunfanaghy Union, and were unattended to, owing to the non-attendance of the relieving officer and the departure of his substitute at an hour in the morning before the applications could be made; whether numbers of these applicants, some of whom had travelled long distances, were in a starving condition, and could obtain no relief, except through the diminishing aid of private charity; and, whether the Local Government Board will take any steps to compel the Dunfanaghy Board of Guardians to afford outdoor relief to the poor?

As this Question only appeared on the Paper yesterday, there has not been time to obtain a written Report; but I have received a copy of a telegram sent to the Local Government Board by their Inspector, Dr. Woodhouse, who had been directed to make inquiry on the subject. From that telegram it appears that the relieving officer having been disabled by an accident, his son has been appointed to act as his substitute. He attended at Bun-beg on Monday at his father's usual hour—the telegram does not mention the hour—and waited until 12 o'clock in the day, up to which hour no applications for relief were received. He then left. Further particulars are expected by post. In the meantime, it does not seem likely that the facts are as grave as is indicated by the Question; as, if the circumstances and condition of the people were such as described, they would, no doubt, have attended at Bunbeg at the usual hour, or would have applied to the relieving officer at his house. But I prefer not passing judgment upon the matter until I get particulars.

said, the right hon. Gentleman had not answered whether it was not a fact that the Dunfanaghy Guardians had persistently disobeyed the instructions of the Local Government Board with reference to the giving of outdoor relief?

imagined he could hardly describe the Guardians as having deviated from the instructions of the Local Government Board. They had acted, according to their judgment, within their legal powers; and the Local Government Board could not interfere with them without altogether overstepping the principles of local responsibility.

Is it not so that the Board have not, as a matter of fact, given any outdoor relief, although the Local Government Board Inspector reports that ono-third of the people are without visible means of subsistence?

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether a scheme for the assurance of the lives of British soldiers was submitted to the War Office in February last by Captain Upton, 9th battalion Derbyshire Regiment; whether that scheme has been considered or approved of; and, whether he will inform the House as to the nature of the proposals, and the determination arrived at by the authorities in regard to them?

asked what necessity there was for insuring the lives of British soldiers, so long as the policy of the Liberal Government was only directed against feeble nationalities?

The hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for Wigtonshire should, I think, have addressed this Question to me, as representing the finance branch of the War Office under the direction of my noble Friend the Secretary of State for War. In reply, I have to say that a scheme of life assurance applicable to soldiers was submitted by Captain Upton to the War Office. It was duly considered; and it was not thought advisable to adopt the scheme. Speaking of it in general terms, as the bon. and gallant Baronet asks me the Question, the scheme was to give some Insurance Office, which was unnamed, a monopoly of the business to the prejudice of other Insurance Offices; and the Pay Sergeants and Sergeant Majors of the Army were to act as collectors and agents for it. It is considered at the War Office that if any scheme of assurance for soldiers should be adopted, it should be in connection with the national system of insurance which is preparing by my right hon. Friend the Postmaster General, and will be carried on under the auspices of the Post Office.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, in relation to Clause 7 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill, which extends the Carriage Duty—

"so as to embrace any vehicle drawn or propelled upon a road or tramway, or elsewhere than upon a railway, by steam or electricity, or any other mechanical power,"

My hon. Friend speaks of the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill. The Bill became law some time ago, and while it was passing through the House I answered more than once a Question similar to the one he puts now. But it is not my function to interpret Acts of Parliament; and I can only say that the distinction between a tramway and a railway is ono which has been recognized for purposes of taxation for many years, and that no difficulty on the subject has presented itself.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Whether, since the object of the Agricul- tural Holdings Bill is to encourage the employment of tenant capital on the land, the Government will introduce in Committee provisions to prevent the raising of the rates on improvements made by tenants for a reasonable time?

It appears to me that the exemption or abatement, as suggested, would work unfairly to other ratepayers, whose rates would be unduly increased. Moreover, the special cost involved in such an arrangement would, in the vast majority of instances, be out of all proportion to the modicum of relief afforded to the tenant.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether a Vote in Supply will be taken for the payment of salaries and expenses of the Commission of Inquiry recently held upon the affairs of Jamaica?

The expenses of the Commission of Inquiry on the affairs of Jamaica will be charged to the Colonial funds up to the date of their leaving that Island; so there will be no Vote in Supply for the costs of this Jamaica inquiry.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is proposed to grant a further sum of £500 per annum, in addition to the £500 per annum now granted to the manager of the Kitchen Department; arid, if so, whether a full opportunity of discussing the grant will be afforded?

The Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms Committee have made this recommendation; but it has not yet been officially brought before the Treasury. When this is done it will be our duty to present a Supplementary Estimate for the purpose.

asked the Postmaster General, If he can state what precautions are taken to protect the public against the fall of the enormous and increasing mass of metal used in telegraph and telephone wires stretched overhead the public thoroughfares?

In reply to the hon. Member, I may say that only a small proportion of the overhead telegraph and telephone wires in London belong to the Post Office, and that the majority belong to private Companies. As I previously stated, in one of the leading thoroughfares in the City, out of 97 wires, only three belong to the Post Office. As regards the poles and wires of the Post Office, every care is taken, by frequent inspection, to see that they are in proper condition.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he is now able to state whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to propose a Vote in Supply for the purpose described in his Notice of Motion, of "making adequate provision for the interests" of any South African Chief "who may have just claims on them;" whether he can inform the House of the course which Her Majesty's Government intend to pursue with respect to the Transvaal Convention and Basutoland; and, whether he can now fix a day for the Debate on South Africa?

This Question embraces three different subjects, and I will take the second of them first—that is to say, whether I can inform the House of the course which Her Majesty's Government intend to pursue with respect to the Transvaal Convention and Basutoland. When I last addressed the House on this subject I stated that the views of the Government, so far as they were at present developed, had been embodied in a despatch which was on the eve of being sent to South Africa. Since that time the Earl of Derby has had the opportunity of communicating with a Member of the South African Government (Mr. Merriman), who is now in this country, and has taken the opportunity of expressing more fully his views in the contents of that despatch. The despatch will probably go by mail to-morrow. The Basutoland question, being in what I may call so active a state, will occupy the attention of the Lord High Commissioner, or the Acting High Commissioner at present, and will prevent him from undertaking duties at a greater distance connected with the present state of affairs in South Africa. Her Majesty's Government, therefore, with reference to the question of the Transvaal Convention, have determined to advise the sending out of a Special Commissioner to South Africa. The business of that Special Commissioner will be to consider our present relations with the Transvaal Government, and the terms and conditions of the Convention, now that they have been illustrated by the working of a certain time, and by the experience thus afforded. The functions of the Special Commissioner will, of necessity, bring within his view the state of Bechuanaland, which it will be his duty to consider in concert with the High Commissioner at Cape Town. The right hon. Baronet and the House will have observed in the newspapers certain telegraphic communications within the last few days to the effect that Mankoroane has signed a Petition, together with his Councillors, praying for annexation to the Cape of Good Hope. That, of course, opens up a very important question. We are not informed at present that any definite resolution has been taken by the Government of the Cape; but still we have certain preliminary information which leads us to believe—though I cannot say the proposition will be accepted by the Cape—that it is probable it will be entertained. These are matters of great importance with respect to the future. I trust that in the course of a few days I shall be able to state to the House who the Commissioner we propose to send out will be. Under those circumstances, I have no answer to give with regard to any Vote in Supply, or with reference to any possible demand that may have arisen under certain circumstances in South Africa; nor can I suggest or advise anything at the present time with regard to a debate on the subject; but, of course, I am aware of the engagement made by the Government, and I do not at all say that that engagement should not be fulfilled.

Will the despatch which the right hon. Gentleman has mentioned be laid upon the Table; also the instructions to the Special Commissioner?

The instructions to the Special Commissioner are not yet prepared; but, of course, they will be laid on the Table, and, I hope, on an early day. But I will take the opportunity of considering the matter with my Colleagues. With regard to the Basutoland despatch, I will also consider what shall be clone. My own impression is that, considering that this is not a matter dependent on our own will exclusively, but a rather complex matter, which we have to conduct, in a certain sense, with the Government of the Cape, it is very doubtful whether that despatch should, in the first stage, be laid on the Table before it has been received and acted upon at the Cape.

I will repeat my Question at a later date.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If he took any steps to ascertain the opinion of the Canadian people or governments before nominating the Marquis of Lansdowne as Governor General of the Dominion?

The hon. Gentleman is probably aware that Her Majesty's Government are, of necessity, engaged from time to time in the nomination of Governors of very important Colonies, and of Canada among the rest; and I do not ever recollect having seen it asked whether we had taken steps to ascertain the opinion of the Canadian people or Government with regard to these appointments, nor am I aware of the particular motive that has suggested that Question in the case of Lord Lansdowne. All I can say is that we never have taken, nor do we intend to take, any measure of that kind; but I believe that in this case, as in every other case, Her Majesty's Government, with the assistance which they possess, have ample means of ascertaining what are the general sentiments of the Colonies with regard to the sort of persons they wish to receive, and of insuring that they will be well received. I should think if a Gentleman happens to be possessed of station, high character, and great ability, these are requisites which go a long way towards insuring him the best possible reception, and which very few persons in this House would deny to be possessed in rather an eminent degree by Lord Lansdowne.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Treasury has refused to purchase the Ashburnham MSS. at the price asked for by the owner, and approved by the Trustees of the British Museum; whether the refusal is final, or whether a further effort will be made to secure these valuable manuscripts for the Nation; and, if he could state what is the amount in dispute?

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If there is any truth in the statement in Monday's papers that, notwithstanding the acceptance by the Government of the honourable Member for Burnley's resolution in favour of economy, they have consented to expend £70,000 in the purchase of a portion of the Ashburnham Manuscripts?

This question had not been treated as a Treasury question, but as ono that demanded the consideration of the Government generally. With regard to the purchase of the Ashburnham Collection on the terms asked by the noble Lord, and recommended by the Trustees of the British Museum, the Government did not think they would be justified in entertaining the proposal for the purchase of the entire Collection. With respect to a purchase of a portion of the Collection, the negotiations are still going on, and I think hon. Members will agree that in that case it would be better for me not to enter into the matter at present. With regard to the Question of the hon. Member (Mr. Carbutt), I must ask him to suspend his judgment, as I do not wish to depart from the spirit of the answer I have just given.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether his attention has been called to an article in the "Pall Mall Gazette" of the 18th of June, in which it is stated, with reference to the Corrupt Practices Bill, that—

"There notoriously resides in the bosoms of some Irish Judges a very bitter hatred of Mr. Parnell and all his works. What is to prevent Mr. Justice Lawson and a Court composed of Judges of similar temper and leanings from finding that there has been undue influence, and thereby making Mr. Parnell incapable of being elected to or sitting in the House of Commons for ten years;"

I have examined the Question of the hon. Member, and have considered the passage to which it refers. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman imagines that the Government have power to notice the passage under the existing law, or whether they ought to alter the law to meet the case. We have no power under the existing law to notice the passage, and we do not see any occasion for proposing a change in the law. The character of the Judges of the land is, I think, generally best secured by public confidence, which alone can give dignity and satisfaction in their high office. I greatly doubt whether it is expedient that a man in an official position should undertake to be a critic of criticisms of this kind, and to have his criticisms criticized by others; but as Mr. Justice Lawson is named in this particular case, and as I have had the honour of his acquaintance, and co-operating with him in former years in important matters, I may say that, so far as I understand this passage, it is one of very considerable scope and extent. It amounts, I think, to an impeachment of Mr. Justice Lawson's judicial impartiality; and, therefore, I wish to bear testimony, as an individual—for I have no right to speak officially about it—that from long experience of Mr. Justice Lawson, I have always regarded him as a gentleman of great capacity and perfect honour and integrity, and I know that no temptation would induce him to deviate from the path of official duty.

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the severe condemnation passed by the Government on similar statements in the Irish papers, he will not find it possible even to condemn statements of the kind from his place in Parliament when made in English newspapers?

I have nothing to add to what I have already said.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether it is true that Mr. Godley has been appointed to the vacant post of permanent Under Secretary of State for India; and, if he can state what official experience this officer has had in Indian affairs?

As this Question relates to the Indian Department of the Government, my right hon. Friend the Primo Minister has asked me to answer it. In consequence of the contemplated resignation of Sir Louis Mallet, whose health, after 42 years' continuous service, no longer allows him to devote himself to the very onerous duties of the Office which he so ably fills, it will become necessary to nominate his successor; and it is the intention of the Secretary of State for India to nominate Mr. Godley. In appointments of this kind the absence of special Indian experience has not hitherto been considered a disqualification.

Might I ask is this another case of promoting a Premier's Private Secretary?

gave Notice that on Monday he would ask, in consequence of the intimation given to the House that Mr. Godley had been appointed to succeed Sir Louis Mallet at the Indian Office, How many years Mr. Godley had been a member of the English Civil Service; and, whether, as Permanent Under Secretary of State for India, he would not have under him upwards of 600 clerks, many amongst them men of great capacity and ability, who had served the State faithfully for a period of 30 or 40 years?

begged to give Notice that, when the noble Lord asked that Question, he should also ask, What was the age of Mr. Godley and what was the age of the noble Lord; and whether the noble Lord had not precisely the same number of clerks under him in that Department four or five years ago?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the Government can promise any day for the discussion of the principles involved in the Bill which has been lately introduced to remove some of the obstables that impede the intentions of Parliament with respect to the development of the system of arterial drainage in Ireland; and, if such day cannot be granted, whether the Government will consent to withdraw the Bill now before the House, so as to enable a discussion to be taken upon the Motion which stands first for Tuesday next?

As the hon. and gallant Member knows, the Bill of the Government deals with the whole question of drainage and land improvement, and contains provisions for removing, in an immediate practical way, difficulties which are daily felt; it has been carefully prepared, and, although its progress is at present blocked, it would be inexpedient to withdraw what is a complete project of legislation, in order to facilitate the discussion of an abstract Resolution. The question can, of course, be reconsidered later on; but we do not despair of passing a Bill which we believe is wanted.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Dead Letter Office had recently sent to the offices of the Municipal Reform League more than 750 letters, containing forged tickets for the Municipal Reform Meeting at St. James's Hall, and which had been addressed to the defunct Conservative Associations, Liverymen, and City Guilds, and persons connected with the City of London; and, whether he could give facilities for discovering the authors of this attempt to interfere with the free right of public meeting?

asked whether the Postmaster General, at the same time, would inform the House as to the accuracy of the statement made by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Chelsea (Mr. Firth) on the platform at that meeting, that these letters were sent round by the Corporation of the City of London?

My attention was not directed to this subject until I received a letter from my hon. Friend. I can only say that it really seems to me that the Post Office has nothing whatever to do with the matter. Our duty is, when letters are sent to the Dead Letter Office, to try to return them to those by whom they have been sent, and it is not a part of our duty to find out if the letters are forged or not. In reply to the hon. Baronet, I can only say that I do not think it any part of my duty to inquire into the accuracy of statements made on public platforms.

said, he believed it was the case that when a Bill had been referred to a Select Committee, and the labours of that Committee were not completed at the end of the Session, it might resume its work next Session at the point whore it had left off. He wished to ask whether the same rule applied to Grand Committees; and whether they could take up a Bill next Session at the stage where it was left in this Session?

As the House is aware, the act of Prorogation of Parliament terminates the existence of Bills on the Order Book of the House; and Standing Committees will have existence only to the end of the present Session of Parliament, unless otherwise ordered by the House.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What course the Government intends to pursue in regard to the Bill of the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) in regard to Irish Labourers?

, in reply, said, ho was glad to say that ho thought the promise he gave off-hand, without knowing the circumstances, had been kept as well as promises could be expected to be kept. That day the Irish Office has practically agreed with the Treasury as to the Amendments, and had obtained their consent. He hoped to have them in printed form by to-morrow, and that they would be in the hands of Members on Saturday.

said, the hon. Member for Galway would put down the Bill for Monday.