, in rising to move—

"That the Committee of Selection do appoint a Committee, not exceeding Seven in number, to whom shall he referred all Private Bills promoted by Municipal and other Local Authorities by which it is proposed to create powers relating to Police or Sanitary Peculations which deviate from, or are in extension of, or repugnant to, the general Law:—That Standing Order 173a shall he applicable to the said Committee:—Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum,"

said, he was glad to hear the explanation of his hon. Friend (Mr. Hibbert), as he thought the House would naturally expect to have some good reasons given to them for dealing with these very important Bills in an exceptional manner. His hon. Friend had done no more than justice to the labours of the Committee of 1882, and he (Mr. Sclater-Booth) might say, in respect to those labours, that on that occasion, for the first time, the attention of Parliament was directed to the anomalous character of the proceedings, which, from year to year, were being conducted in the Private Bill legislation of the House, and which involved serious alterations of the existing law. With a view of conducing to the public, as well as private interests, special provisions had been enacted by the Standing Order in regard to Railway, Gras, and other Bills; but Bills promoted by the corporations of large communities were now becoming an important part of the Private Bill legislation of the House of Commons. Such Bills, in the interest of the Municipalities, were obliged to deal with subjects which would be much more properly dealt with under the general law. The Committee, of which he had the honour to be Chairman, dealt fairly, but stringently, with the Bills which came before them; and, as the outcome of their labours, a Standing Order was formed, which the House was pleased to adopt, which was intended to give security that similar Bills introduced in future should be dealt with in the same way. What he understood his hon. Friend and the Government to object to was that although the Standing Order was sufficient for this purpose, there was no security that it would be carried out with uniformity in regard to all the Bills that might be brought before different Committees in the course of the same Session. Under the Motion of Reference now proposed, he understood that it was intended to send all these Bills before the same Committee, and to make it compulsory that the Standing Order passed in 1882 should apply to them. If that was so, he could not agree with what his hon. Friend had just said, that the Standing Order had failed in its object. On the contrary, all that he understood was that it had failed to be uniformly applied by all the Committees appointed last year; and on that account, and that account only, the hon. Gentleman proposed that another Special Committee should be appointed. He (Mr. Sclater-Booth) agreed, therefore, that it was desirable that the Motion should be adopted, and that the same policy should be pursued as in other Sessions, so that there might be more uniform dealing with these subjects under the provisions of the Standing Order which was passed in 1882 upon the Report of the Committee to which he had referred.

said, he wished to put a question to the hon. Gentleman who proposed the alteration of the Standing Order (Mr. Hibbert). He wished to know whether the Instruction to the Committee would include questions relating to licensing, because he understood that the Leicester Corporation Bill contained provisions which would affect that matter?

The Leicester Corporation Bill is one of the measures that will come before the Committee.

said, he was glad to hear that that was the case, because he was given to understand that in other instances some extraordinary provisions had been adopted in regard to licensing, which went far beyond the provisions of the Act of George II.

was understood to say that the Leicester Corporation had agreed to withdraw the extraordinary provisions from the Bill.

said, that as reference had been made to the Leicester Corporation Bill, he wished to state that the opposition—if it could be called opposition—of the hon. and learned Member for Stockport (Mr. Hopwood), when the question was before the House a few days ago, arose from some misapprehension on his part; but his hon. and learned Friend was now satisfied that there was nothing objectionable in the Bill. He (Mr. A. M'Arthur) desired also to say he was informed, on the highest authority, that the Bill had been thoroughly discussed in Leicester, and was carried, notwithstanding some opposition, by a majority of 4,000 or 5,000 votes. It was also incorrect to state that it was intended to convert the Wednesday market into a Saturday market. He was told that the new site was much more suitable and convenient for a market than the one to be abolished, that it was twice the size, and almost within a stone's throw of the old market, and that the proposals of the Corporation in this respect were unquestionably approved by a large proportion of the population. Seeing that there was nothing objectionable or unusual in the Bill, he failed to see any necessity for sending it to a Special Committee, the effect of which would simply be to retard the progress of a measure which authorized a much needed improvement, and for no useful purpose. He, therefore, hoped the Leicester Bill would not be sent to the proposed Committee.

said, he had just one word to add in regard to this matter. He thought the Government had done good service to the House in proposing the Motion, and he was sure that the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Sclater-Booth), who had so much signalized himself by his endeavour to deal with the subject, would not be likely to oppose the Motion which had been made. He (Mr. Hopwood) had watched the Reports which had been presented to the House by some of the Committees who had inquired into these matters, and although the House desired, by this Standing Order, that the Committee should give some reasons and explain why they departed from the general law or increased the stringency of these provisions, those reasons were generally of a laconic kind—such, for instance, as "We allowed this because we thought it right." He thought the Instruction given by the House had been hardly fulfilled, and, as that was so, and as there was a possibility of the old neglect upon this subject becoming chronic and being repeated from year to year, he thought the Government had very wisely brought forward this Resolution at this stage. He wished to express his entire satisfaction as to the course which had been taken, because he thought it was essential that, as far as possible in all matters of this kind, the law of the land should be uniform.

asked who was to decide whether a particular Bill contained provisions that were repugnant to the general law? Was it to be left to some Department in the House of Commons, or to the Local Government Board, or to the Home Office? There was another question he also wished to ask. Supposing a Bill, as originally framed, included clauses which were considered to be repugnant to the general law by the authorities, whoever they might be, and the promoters of the Bill consented to withdraw such clauses, would the Bill so amended be withdrawn from the Committee; or, if the Committee was once seized with it, would it be necessary for them to go through with it?

said, he thought it would be a matter for the Chairman of Committees to decide what were the Bills which ought to go before the Committee. In regard to the other question, he thought that if clauses which involved an extension of the law in regard to sanitary or police improvements were withdrawn, the Bill would then plainly come under the ordinary Rules which regulated Private Bill legislation.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he can state in how many towns in Ireland the landlords levy toil for fairs and markets; whether, on the income derived from such tolls, any contribution is made to the local rates; and, whether income tax is paid on said income?

Sir, the Government have no information which would enable me to answer the first and second Questions, nor could such information be obtained without a detailed local inquiry throughout the country. With regard to the last, I believe that income derived from tolls is not exempt from Income Tax; but this inquiry should more properly be addressed to my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury, as the matter is not one within the jurisdiction of the Irish Government.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that on the evening of the 25th of December last a serious assault was committed at Belfast upon a young lad named Andrew Downey, while passing through Sandy Bow, by a number of boys who infest the neighbourhood; whether it is a fact that upon the evening named Downey was felled to the ground by the blow of a stone which inflicted a severe wound, and kicked by several members of the crowd while on the ground; whether Downey has gone deranged owing to the injuries he received on that occasion, and is now confined in the Belfast District Lunatic Asylum, with little or no hope of recovery; whether, it having been proved in court that James M'Ilveen was a member of the crowd from which the stones were thrown, and who admitted to the sergeant of the police in charge of the barracks in Sandy Bow that he was the boy who threw the stone which struck Downey, the magistrates, Messrs. M'Carthy, Johnston, and Andrews, were justified in releasing James M'Ilveen; whether it is a fact that, upon the 9th of January, Mr. John Downey, the father of the injured boy, wrote to the Bight honourable gentleman, inclosing a Report of the case, and calling his attention to its serious nature; and, whether he has taken any stops to have the guilty parties punished; and, if so, what are they?

Sir, it is the case that a boy named Andrew Downey was struck by a stone on the head. No evidence has been produced that he was knocked down or kicked. The stone was thrown from among a crowd of boys, of whom Richard M'Ilveen (not James) was one. He was summoned for the assault, but no evidence of identification was produced. One witness swore positively that he had seen the stone thrown, and that the accused was not the boy who threw it. The injured lad was among the witnesses examined. He did not appear to be seriously hurt; and, in the absence of evidence to identify the accused, the magistrates dismissed the case, without prejudice to any further proceedings that might be taken. There is no foundation for the statement that the boy M'Ilveen admitted to the sergeant of police that he had thrown the stone. Andrew Downey has since become affected with religious mania, and is now in Belfast Asylum. John Downey, the boy's father, addressed a letter to the Government on the subject on the 9th of January, and the case was at once inquired into, with the result that the foregoing facts were elicited, which do not show any way in which the Executive could interfere. The police were advised that it was open to them to bring on the case again if they could obtain any further evidence of identity, either as regards the boy already charged, or any of his companions.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If there be thirty-two governors belonging to the County Down Lunatic Asylum, and, out of that number, there are only four Roman Catholics, or one-eighth of the entire number; if there be fifty-five attendants and tradesmen attached to the asylum, and, out of that number, there are only about eight Roman Catholics, or about one-seventh of the entire number; if the superior officers are all Protestants, except the Roman Catholic chaplain; if all the middle-class officers, such as head attendant, the two shoemakers, the two tailors, baker, engine man, painter, land steward, carpenter, gate man, hall porter, gas man, shepherd, &c. are all Protestants and Orangemen; if he would inquire of the governors how it is that the Roman Catholic attendants and tradesmen are in such a great "minority;" and, are the attendants in the asylum appointed by the governors, or the medical resident superintendent, or by whom?

Sir, the facts were, in the main, as stated, excepting; with regard to the middle class of officers being all Orangemen. Five of them were Orangemen. He was informed by the Resident Medical Superintendent that the applications for those appointments from Roman Catholics were, as a rule, very few. The attendants were appointed by the Resident Medical Superintendent.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Is it the fact that the Government are in possession of evidence proving the innocence of Joseph Poole, recently executed in Dublin?

No, Sir; we are not in possession of any such evidence.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If there was any evidence given at the inquest to show that Giffen was or had been rioting; whether it was not proved that Giffen met his death by being bayonetted in a field into which he and others had been driven off the high road by a charge of cavalry; whether this field was not on the side of the road the furthest away from the route of the Nationalists, and at the time Giffen was stabbed in the back he was going in a direction the opposite to that along which the Nationalists were moving; whether the surgeon who attended Giffen did not swear that it required the full strength of a man to inflict the wound which perforated the young man's body; whether any one, except the Loyalists bayonetted by the police, of the Nationalists, Loyalists, Constabulary, or Troops, were otherwise hurt or contused; whether the Crown Solicitor did not decline to examine the official witnesses who were in attendance in Court; whether such a refusal is not most unusual, if not unprecedented; and, whether under these peculiar circumstances the Government will lay upon the Table the evidence of the inquest, and the reports of the magistrates present, which the Solicitor Gene- ral quoted in the House on February 21st?

Sir, I will answer the last part of this Question first. I will lay upon the Table the evidence, and the Reports referred to. In the opinion of the Government, they give satisfactory answers to the first four queries of the noble Lord. It does not appear that, with the exception of the two men stabbed, any persons were seriously injured. A constable was severely wounded over the eye by a stone, and while a party of military were being halted a revolver was discharged at them from the direction of an Orange party. The official witnesses referred to in the Question had been required to be produced by the solicitor for the next-of-kin of the deceased. They were accordingly produced, but he declined to ask them any questions or to examine them. The Crown Solicitor did not consider it necessary to do so.

Is there any precedent for a Crown Solicitor refusing to examine official witnesses at an inquest?

I am informed that there is every precedent in the world. His reason was that he thought the case sufficiently strong without such examination; but I am bound to say that the Law Officers in Dublin had not time to consult with the Crown Solicitor on the subject. It turned out that the evidence was, for his immediate purpose, sufficiently strong.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, on the 7th of January 1884, Dr. Cremin, the sanitary officer of Charleville, gave the following certificate regarding the stables attached to the Constabulary barracks:—

, in reply, said, that Dr. Cremin did give a certificate, but it was misquoted in the hon. Member's Question in an important particular. He did not use the word "people;" he referred to the "police." The County Inspector's attention was not drawn to it on his quarterly inspection; but when he heard of it he travelled 27 miles to attend to it. The insinuations with regard to County Inspector Carr and Colonel Bruce were unfounded.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been directed to a decision of Mr. Justice Pearson, on February 14th, in a case, Ballard v. Tomlinson, heard at the High Court of Justice Chancery Division; and, whether, assuming his judgment to be correct, the Government would take steps to remedy an obvious defect in the Law, which permits the pollution of the water derived from wells in the chalk, from which many of the London Water Companies take their supply?

, in reply, said, that the law on this matter had been long established. There was a very clear difference between the water right in respect of water flowing in a defined and well-known water course and water flowing in subterranean channels. In the case of water flowing in an open, well-defined channel above ground, the adjoining owners had a right to resist by the law any diversion or pollution of the water. It was not so in the case of subterranean water, and for this obvious reason, that the manner in which such waters flow was not capable of being ascertained and estimated in the same way. That was the law upon which the case mentioned in the Question was decided, and it could not be altered by Act of Parliament, because it rested on reason and sound sense; but that only affected private rights as between individuals. If there were anything done upon the surface of the ground which led to a general public deterioration of the water-course below the ground, that was a matter which might stand on a different footing, and he would have the matter examined from that point of view.

asked the Vice President of the Council, Whether there is any prospect of arrangements being made for the examination of high schools in Scotland by Government Inspectors or otherwise, in accordance with the intention of "The Education (Scotland) Act, 1878?"

Sir, this question is now under the consideration of the Treasury. I can assure my hon. Friend that I am fully alive to its importance, and I hope very soon to be able to announce the arrangements that have been made.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to the following paragraph in The City Press of January 26th, this year:—

"Some of the minor Companies are setting their houses in order with a view to avoid confiscation should that time arrive, and they are also, in the words of 'Mr. Thwaites Trust,' making themselves comfortable with the money that has been, in most cases, subscribed by themselves, and which, until threatened by a Royal Commission, had been carefully husbanded;"

No, Sir; I do not think the Government will take any measures at all pending the presentation of the Report of the Royal Commission.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in reference to the bull bought by Lord Carbery from the herd of the Rev. T. Stainforth, of Stores Hall, Win lermere, and imported into Ireland on 17th January, 1883, Whether there was any ground for the statement which appeared in The Irish Farmers' Gazette of 3rd February, 1883, to the effect that Professor Ferguson, of the Irish Privy Council Veterinary Department, had reported the illness of the bull to be a true case of foot-and-mouth disease; whether he will also state how far the next animals attacked with foot-and-mouth disease were from the stable in which the bull is reported to have been isolated; how many days the bull remained in Liverpool en route; and, how long his quarantine in Dublin lasted?

, in reply, said, that on January 22nd Professor Ferguson reported that the animal in question was suffering from foot-and-mouth disease. It was kept perfectly isolated, and disinfection was thoroughly carried out. The animals next attacked were two miles from its stable. The bull had remained in Liverpool from the 6th till the 8th January. During this time it was twice inspected and certified free from disease. Quarantine at Dublin lasted until the 22nd February. The animal was certified to have recovered on the 10th. It was not removed from the place of quarantine until March 2nd.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's opinion that the disease was brought to Ireland by drovers was based on evidence?

, in reply, said, that there could be no doubt of it. The first outbreak in Ireland occurred on February 5th, 1883, in three different places in Dublin, amongst cattle belonging to the same person. The cattle were purchased on Thursday, 1st February, in the Dublin market, and while there had been in contact with persons who had come from markets in Lancashire where cases of foot-and-mouth disease had been found. There was no other probable cause of the outbreak. Lord Carbery's bull could not have come into contact with animals in the Dublin market. The bull was from the date of his arrival, January 17th, kept in an isolated stable, and the attendant and the veterinary surgeon in charge were the only persons who had access to the bull, and both were duly disinfected.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Have Her Majesty's Government yet ascertained the fate of the 1,000 women and children in Sinkat; and, what applications have they made for such information?

Sir, I regret to say that a telegram has been received from Her Majesty's Consul at Suakim, stating that no women or children have reached that place from Sinkat; that, as the soldiers carried their wives, they were probably killed; but that the fate of the children is more uncertain.

Will the noble Lord state the day when the Government asked for the information?

I have not the actual telegram with me, but I have no objection to produce it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us when he thought it was worth while to ask any question-about it? What telegrams were sent?

This was the first.

What is the date?

The Question on the Paper is, what application was made? I meant to imply by my answer that the information I gave was in reply to a question addressed by us to the Consul at Suakim.

When?

I have not got the telegram with me.

The Question has been on the Paper for three days whether and what application has been made for information, and the noble Lord's answer shows that it was made. What I want to know is, when the Government asked for the information? I do not ask for the words.

That is a new Question. I have already said I have not the least objection to give the date.

What is it?

I have not got it with me.

I will repeat this Question to-morrow.

asked the Vice President of the Council, Whether it is a fact that in Lochgoilhead Public School castor oil poured down the throat unmeasured from a bottle has habitually been administered to children as a punishment; whether any children at that school have been beaten on the bare solos of the feet as a punishment; whether five children of Mr. Duncan Blair were some months since withdrawn from the school on account of the severe punishments inflicted on one or more of them; and, whether Mr. Blair refuses to send them back on the ground that the teacher has told him that they will got the same sort of punishment when they go back; and whether in the interests of public education, he will order an investigation into the administration and discipline of the school?

Sir, the schoolmaster has admitted that castor oil has been in use in his school. The object, he says, has been to use it not as a punishment, but as a deterrent. I need only say that I regard its use on any pretext as wholly unwarrantable and reprehensible.

Not on any pretext?

The last statement is denied. But with respect to this and the threat to Mr. Duncan Blair's children, and the general conduct of the master of this school, he is an old parochial schoolmaster, and can only be dealt with by the Sheriff. I have directed inquiry to be instituted by the Inspector in the district.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he has caused inquiry to be made into the accuracy of the statements contained in a letter addressed to him, on the 29th ultimo, by the Very Rev. Henry Hewson, P.P. V.F. Belmullet, with regard to the operations of Mr. Tuke's Emigration Committee in the district of Belmullet; whether it is true, as affirmed by the Very Rev. gentleman, that the Tuke Committee, administering not only their own funds, but also the free grant of the money of the State, assigned to them by the Guardians of the Belmullet Union for the emigration of distressed persons, sent out of the country, from the Belmullet Union, 360 families out of a total of about 2,800, and that

"More than one-half of the number emigrated were comfortable, well able to live at home, and, if they chose to emigrate of their own accord, were well able to do so at their own expense;"

, in reply, said, that it was not the case that Mr. Tuke's Committee administered any sum assigned to them by the Guardians of the Belmullet Union. The Committee were requested to undertake the emigration on the ground that the Union was too poor to contribute, and the Committee's own funds were used to supplement the grant from the Local Government Board. Great care was taken in the selection of candidates, and there was strong reason to doubt the accuracy of the statement that any of the 330 or 340 families were able to live at home in comfort, or at their own expense to emigrate together, which was the object of the family emigration. A few figures would refute it. The valuation per head varied from 18s. 8d. to 4s. 4d., the average was less than 14s. The holdings were of the average valuation of £4, and out of a total of 2,700, only 153 were above £10. It was not the case that the Tuke Committee co-operated with dishonestly disposed persons to enable them to evade the payment of just debts. In only one instance did a trader make complaint. He brought a list of persons who, he said, were about to leave the country. He had no evidence that some of the families mentioned on that list the Committee had already refused, and in the remaining cases, after renewed inquiry, the charges were, in the opinion of the Committee, refuted. In a letter communicating the result of the inquiry, Mr. Buxton told the trader that he could not make himself a collector of debts. In regard to the case of one widow the Committee were deceived by the relieving officer, who was in collusion with a man that had relations with her daughter. Upon discovering this the Committee at once discontinued his employment. He saw no ground for instituting further inquiry into the allegation contained in the Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the fact that a youth named John Lynch, recently returned from America, was lodged in Naas Gaol on the 16th instant to undergo a sentence of six months' imprisonment passed during his absence from the Country for an alleged offence committed more than a year ago; and, whether he will inquire into the facts with a view to Lynch's discharge?

Sir, the "youth" referred to is 21 years of age and 6 feet high. In a district where there was at the time a good deal of Boycotting and intimidation, he was summoned for intimidating a man, whose door he forcibly broke open. He absconded after service of the summons, and was convicted in his absence. Whether he went to America or not the police do not know. He has recently returned to Baltinglass, and has been committed to prison to undergo his sentence.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, about ten years since, the Grand Jury of the county of Kerry superannuated the then county surveyor, after more than thirty years' service, with a view to dividing the county and having two surveyors; whether, in answer to the memorial to that effect sent to the Duke of Abercorn, he appointed one county surveyor about the same age as the officer who had been superannuated, and in fact not so well able to discharge the duties, as the late surveyor had made 800 out of the 1,800 miles of road in the county, and therefore had a thorough knowledge of the district; and, whether, since that time, several memorials have not been sent to the present Government asking to have the county divided which have been ignored, the result being that while the county-cess is almost the highest in Ireland, most of the roads are hardly fit to travel on?

, in reply, said, that in 1876 the County Surveyor retired after a long service. The then Lord Lieutenant appointed another gentleman who had experience in another county. He did not know the gentleman's age; he was not a Government officer. It was true that the Grand Jury applied to have the county divided, and this application, more than once renewed, had not been complied with. The ground of the decision was that it was more to the interest of the public that the existing arrangement should continue, and that the duties of the office should be performed by one County Surveyor of experience, with an adequate staff, than by two. In the only case under his notice in which complaints were made as to the state of the roads in Kerry, there was nothing to show that the County Surveyor was in fault.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Capt. Costello, of Edmundstown, county Mayo, has offered to sell to the tenants for sixteen years' purchase that portion of his estate in their occupation, the yearly rental of which is £2,156; whether the tenants have agreed to this proposal, and made arrangements to pay one-fourth of the purchase-money in cash provided the Land Commission advanced three-fourths on mortgage under the Purchase Clauses of the Land Act; whether the one-fourth to be paid by the tenants, or the greater part thereof, has not been agreed to be advanced by a bank to the tenants puisne to the Commissioners' mortgage, the bank considering that they had ample security for such advance; whether the Land Commissioners afterwards, upon the joint application of landlord and tenants, caused the estate to be valued to ascertain if the security offered was sufficient for the proposed loan by them, and whether, as a result of such valuation, the Commissioners intimated that they would not advance more than three-fourths of twelve years' purchase, or thereabouts; whether the landlord, being without any means save the rents of the estate, over which a receiver had been appointed, and which rents were entirely applied towards paying off interest on mortgages, estate outgoings, &c. was obliged to assent to the purchase money being reduced from sixteen to twelve years' purchase; whether the sale is now being carried out at such reduced rate; and, whether the Government intends to take steps to prevent the proper market price of land being depreciated by the action of the Government officials?

, in reply, said, that he had received a Report from the Land Commission, which stated that proposals for the sale to the tenants, under Section 24 of the Land Act, of the plot mentioned in the Costello estate, at an average of 15 years' purchase of the rent, were submitted by the landlord to the Land Commission for approval. The proposals were agreed to on behalf of the tenants, on the condition that three-fourths of the purchase money should be advanced by the Commissioners. The Commissioners were informed that the remaining one-fourth would be lent by a bank; but they were not informed how the advance would be secured. The Commissioners, under the circumstances, ascertained the value of the land to see if the loan could be secured. The result of the valuation did not satisfy them that the security was sufficient as to the number of years' purchase, three-fourths of which they would have been prepared to advance. The negotiation for sale under Section 24 dropped. The Commissioners offered to buy the estate under Section 26 for £25,000, which, in their opinion, was its full value, and this offer had been provisionally accepted by the Government.

gave Notice that on the Estimates he would move to reduce the Vote for the salaries of the Land Commissioners by the amount charged for this purchase.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the complaints of the Trades Union Congress that, of late years, from 50 to 200 per cent of sizing is introduced into cotton goods for the Eastern Markets to give them a fictitious weight and appearance, and that the process also injures the health of the operatives, Whether he has accepted the conclusions of the Report that the Eastern consumer prefers frequent renewal of cheaper clothing to longer use of a more genuine article, that regrets are unavailing, and that the only remedy is to facilitate the process by ventilation and improved arrangements for heavy sizing; and, whether the officers who made the inquiry before coming to their conclusions examined any, and what, Eastern "consumers," or whether they were content with the assurance of the manufacturers that the Eastern middlemen-dealers have become so far demoralized as to distribute fictitious goods which can be passed off on ignorant consumers for the genuine article?

Sir, a Commission appointed by the Home Office had made inquiries as to the over-sizing of cotton goods, but they had done this solely in a sanitary and not in a commercial point of view, the health of the operatives being the only matter of which, in reference to this matter, the Home Office could take cognizance. He was happy to say that the inquiry had already had a good result in the point of view to which it was directed; and he hoped that still further good results would follow. If the hon. Gentleman wanted information as to the commercial aspects of the subject, he must address his inquiry to the President of the Board of Trade.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether two vacancies have not arisen on the staff of the second class of the Sasine Office Edinburgh, by the death of Mr. Robert Anderson and the resignation of Mr. James Kerr; whether, notwithstanding a Memorial was presented in January 1883 by a majority of the clerks in the third class in said office, complaining of a Treasury Minute of December 1882, wherein my Lords proposed to promote those officers who had been instrumental in detecting the frauds which occurred in said office on the first vacancy arising, without respect to seniority, and that, in answer to said Memorial, my Lords assured the Memorialists, through the head of the Department, that such was not their intention, it is now the intention of the Treasury, in filling up the vacancies in the office, to act in accordance with said Minute of 1882 or in terms of said assurance; and, whether he will lay upon the Table a Copy of the Memorial and answer referred to?

Sir, since I answered the Question of the hon. Member relative to this office last week, we have heard of the vacancy caused by the death of Mr. Anderson, but not of that said to be caused by the resignation of Mr. Kerr. The matter of filling up the vacancy caused by Mr. Anderson's death is now under consideration. It is the intention of the Treasury to adhere to the spirit of the Minute referred to. The hon. Member can see the Minute if he chooses. It is scarcely worth while to present it to Parliament.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether the attention of the Admiralty has been called to the case of an able seaman named William Collision, who has been sentenced by a Court to nine months' imprisonment for striking a ship's corporal; whether, considering that the offence of Collision was analogous to those for which Endersby and Quinn have been sentenced to penal servitude, the Admiralty will remit a still further term of the punishment assigned to those men; and, whether, pending further legislation, the Admiralty will take steps to prevent sentences of penal servitude being passed by Naval Courts Martial for assaults on superiors committed without intention of or not involving grievous bodily harm or other circumstances of exceptional gravity?

Sir, the hon. Member speaks of the offences committed by the three seamen named in his Question as being "analogous" to each other. They were, no doubt, analogous in the sense that they were all cases of striking a superior officer; but I need hardly point out to my hon. Friend that offences so described may differ widely in their circumstances and in the degree of punishment they deserve. The court martial in Collision's case appear to have considered that for his offence he would be adequately punished by nine months' imprisonment. It is not the intention of the Admiralty to interfere with naval courts martial as suggested in the Question.

asked whether the Government would grant a Return of the number of officers in prison for in-subordination?

, in reply, said, that he imagined there would be no objection to giving a Return, but as it was the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill this year to amend the Naval Discipline Act, an opportunity would thereby be afforded of discussing the subject.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, seeing the peaceable condition of Drogheda, he can see his way to relieve that town from the operation of the Peace Preservation Act?

Sir, seaport towns stand in a different position in this matter from other localities. One of the reasons for proclaiming such towns under the Peace Preservation Act was to check the unlawful importation of arms, and his Excellency does not at present think he would be justified in revoking the proclamation of Drogheda.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that, although Mr. Clifford Lloyd is at present in the employment of the Egyptian Government, he is actually receiving the pay and emoluments of a first class resident magistrate in Ireland, although he has not discharged any of the duties of that office for the past five months; and, if such an arrangement exists, how long it is proposed to continue it?

Sir, no such arrangement exists. Mr. Clifford Lloyd is on leave of absence without pay.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Captain Plunkett, Special Divisional Magistrate, has publicly admitted the truth of the statement of a brother magistrate that the representation of Hallissey, of Monaning, that he had been fired at, was believed by all who investigated the matter to be false; and, whether any investigation concerning Hallissey's story was in fact held; and, if so, with what result?

, in reply, said, Captain Plunkett denied that he had made any such admission as was here stated. An inquiry was held under the 16th section of the Prevention of Crime Act as to the alleged assault, but no evidence was elicited to implicate anyone. It was not, however, the case that everyone present believed Hallissey's statement to be false.

asked, whether it was not a fact that this statement appeared in all the newspaper reports which were supplied by the Government reporter?

asked the Postmaster General, Whether the last four gentlemen appointed to clerkships in the General Post Office, Dublin, Mr. Ker, Mr. Barnard, Mr. Odium, and Mr. Sheridan, are Protestants, and were appointed to these positions without passing an examination, and over the heads of men of long and faithful service; whether sorters are in the habit of doing the clerical work of the sorting office when the regular clerks are sick or on leave; and, whether he can hold out any hope that clerkships will be thrown open to competition among deserving and competent sorters?

Sir, as previously stated, no inquiry is made as to the religion of any persons appointed by the Post Office. I promoted the four gentlemen referred to by the hon. Member after considering the qualifications of various officers, including the sorters to whom reference is made, because I thought that the four persons selected were the best qualified. These gentlemen had already been in the service for periods varying from 12 to 14 years, and their promotion did not necessitate any examination. They entered at the bottom of their class, and, consequently, were not appointed over the heads of other men. Sorters, except on very rare occasions, are not employed in the room of clerks who are absent from sickness or away on leave.

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether he has recently forwarded to the Treasury a representation recommending an increase of pay to the officers in the Secretary's Department of the General Post Office; and whether that recommendation will extend to the officials in Dublin?

I do not think a Memorial has been forwarded, but I would be glad if the hon. Member gave Notice of the Question.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether before the Ilbert Bill was modified with a view to extend the right of trial by jury in the ease of English prisoners, the opinion of the local governments of India was obtained as to whether such a change could be made without considerable administrative inconvenience; and, if not, whether Her Majesty's Government will, before assenting to the measure, take steps to ascertain if the compromise will in any way injure or impede the administration of justice?

Sir, there is no intention of instituting the inquiries suggested, the matter having already been considered by the Government of India. No special reference was made to the Local Governments as regards this particular modification. But the question was, in some cases, referred to in their opinions on the original Bill. And the Papers already presented show that one of the recommendations of the Government of Bombay was that European British subjects brought for trial before any Sessions Judge should have the right to claim a jury.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that Michael Waters, one of the Crossmaglen prisoners, whilst in Belfast Gaol before his trial, was placed in a cell which, as the water pipes had burst, was flooded; and, whether the said Michael Waters has since died?

Sir, the General Prisons Board inform me that it is not the case that Michael Waters was placed in a cell in Belfast Gaol in which the water pipes had burst, causing it to be flooded. The prisoner died in Mount-joy Prison, Dublin, into which he was received on the 28th April. He was removed to the prison hospital on the 7th June, and died on the 22nd October. The coroner's jury found that he died from disease of the intestines.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true, as stated in a Resolution, moved and seconded by Town Commissioners of Enniskillen, and unanimously adopted by a public meeting of Catholics, held at Enniskillen on Monday last, under the presidency of the Catholic Vicar General of the diocese, that, out of the total number of magistrates in the county Fermanagh, seventy, not even one is a Catholic; whether the Catholic people of the county form a great majority of the whole population; whether, of the seventy magistrates, sixty-three have attached their names to a public manifesto, condemning the Government for having deprived Lord Rossmore of the commission of the peace; and, whether the state of things indicated by these facts will be allowed by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland to continue?

Sir, the Resident Magistrate, Captain M'Ternan, is the only magistrate in the County of Fermanagh who is a Roman Catholic. According to the latest Census Reports, 53 per cent of the population are Roman Catholics; 63 of the magistrates of the county signed the protest referred to. It is the intention of the Government to proclaim, under the Crimes Act, districts where Party riots or Party disturbances are likely to occur, if they are not already so proclaimed, so that cases arising out of such disturbances may be dealt with under Section 8 of that Act. I may take this opportunity to state that when I was in Ireland the general subject of the constitution of the magistracy had engaged my most serious attention and consideration, that I conferred with the Lord Chancellor of Ireland thereon, and that he assured me that no exertion or pains on his part would be spared, so far as he could act, to redress inequality, and to remove or prevent any injustice that might be brought under his notice.

With reference to the recent declaration of the Solicitor General for Ireland, that if the names of proper persons were submitted to the Lord Chancellor he would at once appoint them, I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether, if a representative public meeting like this forwards by public resolution the names of suitable persons to the Lord Chancellor, he will consider them?

Sir, to the first part of the Question of the hon. Member I think I can respond at once that if the names of proper persons are submitted to the Lord Chancellor he will appoint them; but I should be very unwilling to name any special method of recommendation, and I might even go so far as to say that I do not think the recommendation of a public meeting of one religious body, whether Catholic or otherwise, is a good method of submitting such names, and I may tell the hon. Member that we have already acted on that opinion with a Memorial having a similar object in view which was not Roman Catholic.

With regard to the proclamation of places in which riots have taken place, or are apprehended, will the Government take into consideration the propriety of distinguishing between places into which rioters have been imported, and places in which riots have occurred through the misconduct of outsiders; and in that case will the proclamation be applied to the place from which the rioters have been imported, and not the place in which the riots occurred?

That depends, Sir, upon what magistrates there are in the places.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, How many Members of the Orange Society, in the district of Ballymote, where the shooting affray occurred a few days since, have licences to keep revolvers; by whom the granting of these licences was recommended; and by whom the licences were granted; whether those Orangemen who hold licences to keep revolvers have paid for the Inland Revenue licence for leave to carry those weapons; whether, in particular, the three members of the Orange Society now in prison awaiting trial, on a charge of wounding persons with revolvers, had entitled themselves to carry revolvers by payment of the necessary fee, and procurement of the licence from the Inland Revenue Department; and, if not, will the Department proceed against them; and, whether their licences to have revolvers will be revoked?

Sir, from inquiries made in the town of Ballymote, and within a radius of five miles round it, it has been ascertained that there are 37 persons who have revolver licences under the Peace Preservation Act. Most of the licences were granted by the late Resident Magistrate of the district, Captain Gage. Of these 37 persons 34 are Protestants, and of these 10 are believed to be Orangemen; but as to this, the Licensing Officers and Constabulary have no positive means of knowing the facts. Of these 10 persons, eight obtained their licences on the recommendation of two Justices of the Peace, and two were personally known to the Licensing Officer. Only three of them have Excise licences this year. The persons arrested in connection with the recent affray in the district of Ballymote have not Excise licences. This was duly reported by the Constabulary to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. It rests with them to prosecute, and I understand that proceedings have been instituted. With regard to the revocation of the licences under the Peace Preservation Act, it is customary to await the result of pending legal proceedings before revoking such licences.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that, in the first levies for the police tax in the parish of Monanimy, the Lord Lieutenant exempted Mr. Foote, J.P. who resides in the district; whether Mr. Foote joined in the Memorial of the people to the Lord Lieutenant for the removal of the tax; and, whether he was then included in the next levy of the tax?

, in reply, said, that, in the earlier levies, the tax was remitted to Mr. Foote so far as it affected a Constabulary barracks on his property and some unoccupied buildings, the Government being advised that it was not properly chargeable thereon. In a subsequent warrant Mr. Foote's name was, by a clerical error, entered as entitled to exemption for all his property; but the error had been discovered, and was rectified in the latest warrant. That occurred subsequently to Mr. Foote having signed the Memorial, and the fact of his signing the Memorial had nothing to do with his being included in the levy.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, "Whether it is true that the Treasury decided, by Minute, last year, that they would charge interest at four per cent. and not five per cent. on money advanced to Railways in Ireland; and that he, in reply to a Question last Session, said that loans to Steam Tramways would be charged a similar rate of interest; whether the Board of Works in Ireland did then charge the Portrush and Giants Causeway Tramway and Railway Company interest at the rate of four per cent.; whether the Board of Works in Ireland have recently asked that Company to recoup them for the difference between four per cent. and five per cent. for the period during which the lower rate was charged; and, what is the meaning of this demand?

The rate of interest with respect to tramway loans is the same as with regard to railway loans—namely, 4 per cent. The application referred to in the Question of the right hon. and learned Gentleman was made in error, and has since been corrected.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, If he has ascertained, by reports from the Official Inspectors of the Privy Council, or otherwise, that the Steamship Companies engaged in the cattle traffic between England and Ireland have followed the advice of the Privy Council as to the temporary withdrawal of their vessels for the purpose of thorough cleansing and disinfection; and, whether, in the event of the suggestions of his Department not being carried out, he is prepared to insist on his advice being followed?

, in reply, said, the suggestions referred to in the Question were issued by the Irish Privy Council with the concurrence of the British Privy Council. He was informed from Dublin that the principal Steamship Companies had expressed their willingness to meet the views of the Privy Council, and were actually doing so. He, therefore, hoped it would not be necessary to put any pressure upon the Companies.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, "Whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Kerry Sub-Land Commissioners, instead of holding their sittings at Cahirciveen as usual, have held their sittings for that district at Killarney, a distance of forty miles from many of the parties interested; whether this was done at the request of the solicitors who reside in Killarney; and, whether he will recommend that the practice be discontinued?

, in reply, said, the Land Commissioners had informed him that the cases of certain estates lying between Cahirciveen and Killarney were heard at Killarney on the application of the tenants' solicitors, the solicitors for the landlords assenting. In none of these cases had the tenants to travel 40 miles. The remaining cases of the Cahirciveen district would be heard at Cahirciveen next month.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, If, in future, Indian Military Officers are to be allowed to take their general leave in England on the same terms as it can now be obtained in India, and, consequently, if the 1875 Rule, which provides that the furlough must be spent at some place east of the 40th degree of east longitude, is to be abolished?

Sir, if my right hon. Friend refers to the local leave which, to the extent of six months in each year, may be granted at the discretion of the Indian authorities, to officers of the Indian Army who are subject to the Furlough Rules of 1875, I can only say that there is no intention of altering the limits within which this leave may be taken.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to a protest from the Lieutenant and cer- tain Deputy Lieutenants and Magistrates of the county of Wicklow, in which the following occurs:—

"We consider that the action of the Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal, in depriving-Lord Rossmore of the Commission of the Peace for the county Monaghan, was most unjust and ill judged;"

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers this Question I beg to be allowed, in fairness to the gentleman whom it seeks to denounce, to trouble him with another. It is, whether the acceptance of the Commission of the Peace involves the loss of the common right of all citizens to criticize the Government of the day; and if it does not, whether popular confidence in the impartiality of the Administration is likely to be promoted by arbitrary interference with this right, while the magistracy themselves, the judicial body, and the Executive authority are all, by turn, being persistently held up to public scorn and execration in newspapers owned and conducted by Members of this House?

I would rather decline to answer that Question now.

I will put it on the Paper.

I think I laid my view of the case sufficiently before the House in the debate on the Amendment of the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell). I have also more than once answered Questions similar in effect to that of the hon. Member for Wicklow (Mr. Corbet). I have pointed out the material difference which exists between persons with more or less imperfect knowledge of the circumstances expressing an adverse opinion as to the course adopted by the Government, and themselves taking an active part in proceedings similar to those which the Government have condemned. Judged from this point of view, the Government do not think that the protest of the Wicklow magistrates—however much it is to be regretted—calls for special notice.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, When Lord Granville telegraphed, on February 7th, to Sir E. Baring—

"If possible, ask Gordon whether change of circumstances affects his judgment as to going to Khartoum, and whether he has any suggestions to make,"

"Ask Gordon whether he can suggest anything respecting Sinkat and Tokar,"

The change of circumstances referred to was the defeat of Baker Pasha. My answer to the right hon. and learned Gentleman's second Question is in the affirmative. Gordon Pasha received the intelligence of the defeat from Sir Evelyn Baring on his arrival at Berber on the 11th. Lord Granville had on the 5th telegraphed to Sir Evelyn Baring to do what was possible to acquaint Gordon Pasha with the news. Sir Evelyn Baring replied on the 7th that he would, of course, keep General Gordon fully informed, but he could not communicate with him by telegraph till he arrived at Berber. The text of Sir Evelyn Baring's message to General Gordon is not in the possession of Her Majesty's Government.

Is the House to understand that all the time the first four telegrams were sent to General Gordon he did not know the changed circumstances with reference to which his opinion was asked?

There was a further telegram. As already explained by the Prime Minister, General Gordon for a certain number of days, while between Korosko and Berber, was not within reach of telegraphic communication.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's Government can afford any further information as to the crew of the Nisero, wrecked four months ago on the coast of Acheen; and, whether any result has followed the negotiations of the agent of the Governor of the Straits Settlements on their behalf?

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he has any further information respecting the crew of the Nisero; and, if not, whether he expects any which may relieve the prolonged and painful anxiety of the numerous friends of the imprisoned men in Sumatra; and, whether it is not intended to take active measures to secure the deliverance of a British shipwrecked crew now held in captivity by a semi-barbarous chief?

Sir, in reply to the first Question, and to that of my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham, I may state that the crew of the Nisero having been sent into the interior subsequent to the operations of the Dutch expedition, Her Majesty's Government are not in possession of any recent information respecting them. They have not as yet heard the result of the negotiations which have been entrusted to the agent nominated by Governor Weld with a view to obtain the liberation of the prisoners, and until this is the case Her Majesty's Government would not think it advisable to take any active measures.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Dr. P. L. O'Neill, medical officer of the Athy Union, is the same gentleman who was for some time president of the local Land League; whether a warrant was issued for his arrest under the Crimes Act; whether he is now Coroner of the Queen's County; and, whether, having regard to his duties in that capacity and his political antecedents, the Local Government Board will maintain him in the office of a medical officer under that Board?

I am informed, Sir, that Dr. O'Neill was Vice President of the local branch of the Land League at Athy. I cannot ascertain that any warrant was ever issued for his arrest under the Crimes Act. He has been medical officer of the union since 1874; but the fact that he has lately been appointed coroner for the county of Kildare—not Queen's County, as stated—has only now been brought to the notice of the Local Government Board. His political antecedents would not warrant the Board in removing him from his office under them, but the question whether they should object to his continuing to hold the two offices is under consideration. It is a case exactly similar to that of Dr. Parke, of Newtownards, which was brought under my notice some time ago.

Dr. Parke holds two offices in the same district, while Dr. O'Neill holds two offices in different counties.

In Dr. O'Neill's ease the two districts are in the same county.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Dr. O'Neill had sufficient leisure to preside at a Land League meeting on Sunday last?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he will read to the House the Letter addressed by Mr. Hastings to Mr. Healy, M.P. for Monaghan, which the latter gentleman has de-scribed as "incriminatory," and as confirming his suggestion that Mr. Hastings' newspaper, The Irish Citizen, is supported by His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant out of the Secret Service Fund?

I am at a loss, Sir, to know upon what ground the hon. and gallant Member can expect me to read to the House the private correspondence of the hon. Member for Monaghan (Mr. Healy). But I am glad of this opportunity to contradict, in the most emphatic terms, the suggestions that have been made that The Irish Citizen newspaper received, or ever did receive, any support out of the Secret Service Fund. The Lord Lieutenant's support of it was limited to subscribing for one copy, and I may observe that to that extent the support—if it can be called support—of the Irish Government is given to newspapers of every shade of politics, including United Ireland and The Nation, and otherwise advocating similar views.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether the Secretary of State proposes to allow the Act passed by the Governor General of India in Council, No. III. of 1684, by which (1) magistrates of districts are deprived of the power of summary trial of Europeans for minor offences against Natives, which they have exercised since the reign of George III.; and (2) every criminal or party to a criminal trial, European or Native, can demand, as of absolute right, postponement of the trial, for the purpose of making application to a distant High Court for its transfer to another tribunal, and that without any regard to the reasonableness or unreasonableness of the demand, or to the inconvenience to witnesses and other parties, and the possible perversion of justice by means of such delay; whether the Council of India unanimously approved of the Bill as proposed to be modified last summer; and, whether they have been consulted on its subsequent transformation, either before or since it was passed, or now will be consulted; and, if consulted, whether they have approved of it?

Sir, the authentic copy of the Indian Criminal Procedure Code, 1882, Amendment Act, which the Governor General is by statute required to transmit to the Secretary of State, was only received by last mail. No Member of the Council of India dissented from the Secretary of State's despatch of the 8th of November last, concurring in the modifications of the Bill recommended by the Government of India in their letter of August 10. The further modifications of the Bill were not referred home by the Government of India for the consideration of the Secretary of State in Council, but were made during its passage through the Governor General's Council. I may remind my hon. Friend that an Act which has been passed by the Legislative Council, and assented to by the Governor General, does not require to be "allowed" by the Secretary of State in Council. It takes effect in duo course, unless Her Majesty signifies her disallowance of it. The Papers I have referred to are now being printed for presentation to Parliament.

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether his attention has been called to the state of the footpaths in Hyde Park owing to the bad gravel with which they have lately been covered; and, whether he will take any steps to have them improved and laid down with the shell sand hitherto employed?

, in reply, said, that the gravel laid down was exactly the same as that which had been laid down in previous years, but that, owing to the wet season, it had not hardened this winter.

asked the Eight honourable Member the Lord Mayor of London, Whether the City intend to proceed with the Second Reading of the Metropolis Water Bill on March 11th, or whether it is intended to abandon such Bill; and, if it is intended to abandon the measure, whether he will state the reason for such abandonment?

in reply, said, that it was the intention of the Corporation to proceed with the second reading of the Bill referred to on the 11th of March, and he hoped that the House would report the Bill for Committee in the usual way.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the Treasury will be prepared to decide, at a sufficiently early date, which of the tenders for the conveyance of the West Indian Mails (submitted on the 1st December last) they will authorise the Postmaster General to accept, so as to allow the person or Company whose tender may be accepted adequate time to complete arrangements for commencing the service on the 1st January next?

Sir, the decision upon this question has to be suspended until we learn the views of the West India Colonies, who are, of course, very much interested in the matter, and whose duty it will be to contribute their share of the cost of the service. But the Government will make every effort to come to a decision as speedily as possible.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the National Schools of Ireland are conducted on the mixed system; how far technical education is carried out in these schools; whether Reformatories and Industrial Schools are purely denominational; whether technical instruction forms a largo portion of the education in these schools; and, whether he will cause to be extended to the schools which are not intended for the vagrant and criminal classes the same religious privileges and technical instruction which are afforded to Industrial Schools and Reformatories?

According to the fundamental rule of the Commissioners of National Education, the object of the system is to afford combined literary and moral and separate religious instruction to children of all persuasions as far as possible in the same schools. With regard to technical instruction, the rule of the Commissioners is to encourage it in all suitable cases. In all rural boys' schools the manual of agriculture is a compulsory subject, and in the case of 73 schools to which farms are attached, special grants are made for the encouragement of practical agricultural education. Practical dairy instruction is given at the farms at Cork and Glasnevin. In all schools in which female teachers are employed, the girls are taught needlework, for proficiency in which over 128,000 results fees were paid in 1882. There are also 54 schools to which grants are made for instruction in special subjects, such as lace work, embroidery, crotchet, &c. Cookery and domestic economy are taught to the students in the training colleges of Marlborough Street and Bagot Street, that they in turn may teach their pupils when they take charge of schools; and the students of the male training college in Marlborough Street are, with a similar object, taught the use of tools. Reformatory and industrial schools are strictly denominational, and technical education formed a large portion of the education in these schools. The last paragraph of the hon. Member's Question opens up a field for consideration much too large to be satisfactorily dealt with in answer to a Question. Much difficulty would exist in the way of increasing the technical education now given, while to make the national schools essentially denominational would be a complete subversion, not only of the Irish national school system, but also of the English and Scotch systems of public education.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether any of Her Majesty's Ships on the East Indian Station are provided with the electric light; and, if not, whether prompt steps will be taken to remedy so serious a defect?

Sir, of the ships on the East India Station, the Euryalus alone is of the class now usually fitted with the electric light, and she was not so fitted when she left England in August, 1878. The Hecla, now in the Red Sea, carries the electric light, and is at the disposal of the Admiral for any purpose requiring its use. We have not heard that he has used it. It is not intended to fit the electric light to the smaller class of ships of the Squadron.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether any determination has yet been arrived at with regard to any change in the rate of interest at which the Public Works Loans Commissioners are authorised to advance money for Harbour Works?

In reply to my hon. Friend, I have to say that it would not be possible to answer his Question except in debate, when full explanations can be given, and that the information he requires will be fully stated when he calls attention to the question on the Motion of which he has given Notice for the 18th of March.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether there is any prospect of "The Sea Fisheries Act, 1883," shortly coming into operation?

Sir, the North Sea Fishery Convention concluded at the Hague will, I expect, be ratified shortly, and when that has been done the Sea Fisheries Act, 1883, which confirms that Convention, will be brought into force with as little delay as practicable.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the exceptional experience of Miss Octavia Hill on questions relating to the housing of the poor, he will consider the advisability of her being appointed to serve on the Royal Commission which is about to inquire into the subject?

Sir, there can be no doubt as to the exceptional experience of Miss Hill, and I have myself for the last 13 years had personal knowledge of her excellent system. I may, however, point out to the House that the experience of highly skilled persons is often more valuable when they have an opportunity of giving evidence before a Royal Commission than when they are themselves Commissioners.

The Prime Minister stated on Tuesday last, in answer to a Question whether the inquiries of the Commission on the dwellings of the poor would extend to Scotland and Ireland as well as to England, that he had not then an opportunity of consulting the right hon. Gentleman near him. I now wish to ask him the following Question, of which I have given him private Notice, Whether the Royal Commission will extend its inquiries to Ireland and Scotlnnd; and, if so, whether it is not desirable that an Irish and a Scotch Member should be placed on the Commission?

Inquiry will, no doubt, have to be made, either now or later, into the housing of the working classes in Scotland and Ireland. If the Royal Commission, at its preliminary meeting, should decide to consider at an early date the question of the housing of the working classes in either Scotland or Ireland generally an addition to the Royal Commission will probably be recommended to the Queen.

Is there anything in the practice of Royal Commissions to prevent a Member of such Commission giving evidence?

On Committees of the House it is not unusual, but I do not think it is very usual on a Royal Commission. I do not know, however, that there is anything to prevent it.

asked why there was no Irish Member of the existing Commission?

As regards the Irish inhabitants of this country, I think they would have confidence in the name of Cardinal Manning; but as regards Irishmen in Ireland, I think that would be very much a matter for the Commission to consider.

Seeing the personality of the Commission has been referred to, may I ask, as there is a Bishop of the Episcopal Church of England and a Roman Catholic Prelate on the Commission, whether the right hon. Gentleman does not think it desirable that some influential person connected with the Nonconformists should also be appointed a Member?

Without in the least admitting that it has any bearing on the question, I may state that, as a matter of fact, there are several Nonconformists on the Commission.

But not clergymen.

No, Sir; and I say at once that Cardinal Manning is not a Member of the Commission as the head of the Roman Catholic Church in this country, nor the Bishop of Bedford as a Prelate of the Episcopal Church; but they have been nominated, not because they represent largo communities, but because they have taken great interest in, and thoroughly understand, the question.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether there was any objection to place a lady on a Royal Commission?

That is hardly a Question for me to answer, as it has nothing to do with the duties of my Department. But there is nothing, so far as I know, to prevent a lady being put on a Royal Commission.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the following translation, published in The Times, of General Gordon's proclamation on the subject of slavery, is correct:—

wished, before that Question was answered, to ask whether, having regard to the extraordinary and exceptional character of the mission of General Gordon, it would not be better to leave General Gordon to carry out, unmolested and in his own way, the duties which he had so courageously undertaken, and not through Questions addressed to Her Majesty's Government, especially when those Questions were founded on imperfect information—[Cries of "Order!"]

having interposed, Sir HENRY TYLER resumed his seat.

Sir, undoubtedly I concur, and very strongly concur, with the general sentiment expressed in the truncated Question of the hon. Gentleman. I understood, likewise, as far as I could interpret the feeling of the House, that to be the decided feeling of the House. But, at the same time, it was quite understood that the case of this Proclamation was to be treated as an exception. The Government have given a pledge for its production, and they do not regard it in the main as a political Proclamation. On that ground I cannot find fault with the hon. Gentleman (Baron De Worms) for the inquiry he has made. My reply to that inquiry will not be held to involve me in any inconsistency if I should decline to reply to other inquiries respecting General Gordon of a different character. But I must still ask the hon. Gentleman's indulgence to some extent. We have received the authentic text of what appears to be General Gordon's Proclamation, and that authentic text has been laid upon the Table to-night. Hon. Gentlemen will, therefore, have the opportunity of considering it for themselves. It is not in accordance with the terms of this Proclamation, and that is all, I think, that I can say at the present moment, because it is not in my power absolutely to assert that General Gordon has not issued some Proclamation with which this may be in more or less correspondence. We have sought the Proclamation to which the discussions in this House referred. It is the text of that Proclamation which has been sent to us, and it will now be in the hands of hon. Members. The hon. Gentleman will, therefore, not expect me now to answer the closing clause of his Question, in reference to the consistency of the text of this Proclamation with the Act of 1807. But I cannot reply to the Question without stating that our confidence in General Gordon on this subject is absolute and unabated. Our belief is, that he has issued no Proclamation whatever that is in any manner in conflict with the Act of 1807.

asked, whether the Proclamation would be laid on the Table in Arabic, as well as the translation of it, in order to afford the Arabic scholars of the country the opportunity of comparing the translation with the original?

Sir, we are not in possession of any Arabic original or version, whichever it be, and I am not able to undertake to seek for this Arabic document until and unless it can be shown to me that there is some special reason why so unusual a course should be adopted, because it certainly would be attended with a good deal of prac- tical inconvenience to the working of our Parliamentary system.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, By what means it is proposed to raise the funds requisite for the repair of the fabrics of Westminster Abbey and Peterborough Cathedral; and, whether such an inquiry as to the lands and other property held by the Ecclesiastical Commission as was approved in principle by Her Majesty's Government on March 31st 1882, would not afford the best means of obtaining a satisfactory provision?

said, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to answer, at the same time, the Question on the same subject that he placed on the Paper for Thursday next.

Perhaps I may answer at the same time the Question put by my hon. Friend, and also that proposed to be put to me upon the same subject on Thursday next by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Westminster. We have been for some time in communication upon this matter with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and with the Deans of Westminster and Peterborough; and during the present Session I hope to introduce a Bill which will deal with the general subject, including provision for the fabrics of the Abbey and the Cathedral of Peterborough. It would be premature to enter into details until the Bill is before Parliament.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Correspondence which has lately passed between the Workmen's National Association for the abolition of Foreign Sugar Bounties and Her Majesty's Government on the subject of the Home and Colonial Sugar industries?

Sir, the Correspondence to which reference is made by the hon. Gentleman consists, no doubt, of the letter which the Work- men's Association addressed recently to me, and the reply which I sent them; and these have been published in the newspapers. Since that time a rejoinder has been published by the Workmen's Association, and to that rejoinder, I apprehend, probably an answer will be made. I think, therefore, that any Question on this subject had better stand over till the Correspondence is complete.

Sir, I put a Question to the Government last Friday night, and gave Notice that I would repeat it to-night. In the first place, I asked whether the Government had received confirmation of the surrender of Tokar; and, secondly, what effect that surrender, if true, would have upon the operations in Egypt? If the noble Lord can give us any information with regard to those operations we shall be obliged?

Sir, although the report of the surrender of Tokar was received in this country on Friday, yet the telegrams which were received on that day and on Saturday, both from Trinkitat and Suakin, appeared to throw some doubt upon the accuracy of the reports; and it was only late yesterday evening that Sir William Hewett telegraphed from Suakin confirming the reports. There was, therefore, no reason for suspending the movement of troops to Trinkitat. Instructions were sent on Saturday to General Graham at Trinkitat, to some extent restricting the scope of his operations; but giving him very full discretion to act under certain contingencies. He has been asked further to report fully to the Government upon the position which he finds existing at Trinkitat. But that report has not yet been received. The principal object to which his attention will now be directed will be to secure the safety of Suakin, which appears at present to be threatened by the tribes. I do not think at the present moment it would be desirable, or at all expedient, that I should enter into any further detail in regard to the instructions to General Graham, or the movements which it may be necessary to undertake.

May I ask the noble Lord whether General Graham is empowered to negotiate with Osman Digma, or to slaughter his forces?

General Graham has I believe, no special instructions as regards that; but I presume he has the same discretion that is usually given to the commanding officer of troops on active service.

asked the noble Lord, whether it was a fact that Tokar did not surrender until the 22nd; and whether he could state why the promise made to Sir William Hewett on the 12th February, that a sufficient force to relieve Tokar would be at Suakin on the 19th, was not carried out?

I do not think we have any information yet as to the exact date on which Tokar did surrender. The telegram referred to by the hon. Member gave the 19th as the day on which it was anticipated that the force would be at Suakim.

asked, whether it was in the discretion of General Graham to advance against the forces of Osman Digma beyond Suakin?

That appears to me to be one of those Questions which it would be extremely undesirable to answer. I have already stated the general object of the instructions to General Graham, but I do not think it would be at all desirable to state the precise character of those instructions.

asked how General Graham could provide for the safety of Suakin when he was with his forces at Trinkitat?

inquired whether the noble Lord could state, as a matter of policy of Her Majesty's Government, what was the nature of the relations between them and Osman Digma, seeing that the latter was, as he understood, the Lieutenant of the Ameer of Kordofan, to whom Her Majesty's Government had proffered the terms of a friendly alliance?

I beg to ask the Prime Minister the following Question, of which I have given private Notice:—Whether any overtures have been made to the Government and the Trustees of the National Gallery in respect to the purchase of the Blenheim Collection of pictures, or of any portion thereof; and, if not, having regard to the report that the property is for sale, Her Majesty's Government will consider the expediency of negotiating for the purchase of some, at least, of the masterpieces of acknowledged historic value and artistic excellence which form part of that Collection?

Sir, no overtures have been made to Her Majesty's Government, or, to our knowledge, to the Trustees of the National Gallery. Certain rumours have reached Her Majesty's Government and the Trustees of the National Gallery; but I do not think that, upon the ground of those rumours, it would be at all prudent on the part of Her Majesty's Government, or of the Trustees, to take the initiative in this matter. In fact, in my opinion, and as far as I can judge, the question is not mature for any practical measure; and I believe that nothing is yet absolutely settled as to the sale of these pictures, or as to what portion, if any, shall be sold. We have no authentic information.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he had received from the Medway Board of Guardians a Report from their medical officer, Dr. Buchanan, relating to the present state of contagious disease at Chatham; whether this Report was not in possession of the Local Government Board on Thursday last, when the right hon. Baronet said that he had received no Report from Dr. Buchanan; and, whether the right hon. Baronet would lay the Report on the Table of the House?

The answer to the first branch of the right hon. Gentleman's Question is in the affirmative. A copy of the Report was received at the Local Government Board on Thursday last, the day on which the Question of the right hon. Gentleman was asked. I have seen the Report, which goes outside the question of Poor Law administration, which is the only aspect of the subject which concerns the Local Government Board. I do not think it of a nature to receive the general circulation which would be the case were it laid before Parliament; but I shall be happy to let the right hon. Gentleman see it himself if he desires to do so.

expressed his intention of moving that the Report be laid on the Table of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it was a fact, as stated in The Observer, that the officer known as Baker Pasha had been recently wearing Her Majesty's uniform during the operations near the Red Sea; and, if so, whether he had acted with the sanction of the military authorities?

I must ask for Notice of that Question. My attention has not been called to the paragraph in question.