asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he is aware that, in certain conditions of the wind, considerable avoidable inconvenience is caused to the Irish travelling public, including numerous Members of Parliament, by the lack of protection and shelter from rain and storm when shipping and landing as passengers between Kingstown and Holyhead; whether he is aware that the contractors for the carriage of Her Majesty's Mails between Holyhead and Kingstown have repeatedly applied for works to be carried out at the Carlisle Pier, Kingstown, and the Royal Mail Packet Jetty, Holyhead, which they state to be necessary for the protection of the Mail Packets, and for the shelter and convenient landing and shipping of Mails and passengers; and, whether he can state what steps he proposes to take to meet the wants complained of?

Sir, no complaints have been made, except by the Packet Company, of the lack of protection to passengers at this harbour; and, so far as I am aware, there is no obligation upon the Government, either by their contracts or otherwise, to provide improved accommodation for passengers there. As regards the second part of the Question, I answered a similar one a week ago relating to Holyhead. In the case of Kingstown, the Packet Company, if they think there is any risk, should apply to the Board of Works in Dublin, in whom the harbour is vested, and who would, no doubt, ascertain whether the present state of things affords reasonable security to the mail packets.

asked Mr. Attorney General, Whether his attention has been called to the following observations of Mr. Justice Grove, made on Saturday the 25th July, during the trial of the case of the Triumph Steamship Company (Limited) v. the Dartmouth Harbour Commissioners, viz.:—

"It was hardly possible to exaggerate the inconvenience of the present system. He had just learned that on Monday he had to sit in banco, on Tuesday he could go on with this case, which, however, would probably not finish on that day. On Wednesday he believed he should have to sit at the Old Bailey, and how long he would be detained there he had no idea. All he could therefore say was, that the further hearing must stand over until Tuesday;"

"He was sorry that the new system under which the Assizes were held proved so inconvenient, and that, owing to the amount of business he had to go through at Norwich and other towns, he had been obliged to alter the dates for holding the Assizes at Chelmsford, Hertford, and Lewes; and even now, if he could not obtain the assistance of a Commissioner to whom he had made application for help, he was afraid he must again alter his present arrangements, for the two remaining Judges were obliged to stay in London, one taking work at Chambers, and the other being engaged with criminal business at the Old Bailey. He also referred to the great expense that the special jurors, petty jurors, and witnesses were put to at having to remain in the town for so long a time, owing to one judge having to take both civil and criminal business;"

in reply, said, that these Questions should have been addressed to his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department; but, after communicating with the right hon. Gentleman, he (the Attorney General) might say that the arrangements for the business of the Circuits, and also for the sittings in London, lay with the Judges themselves, who would now, as in the past, consider the interests of suitors and all concerned. The question of increasing the number of Judges, to which the hon. and learned Gentleman who put the Question referred, was one involving numerous and serious considerations, and could only be done by legislation.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord lieutenant of Ireland, If he will state the number of cases of pleuro-pneumonia in cattle reported in the three Dublin Unions during the first six months of the present year; the number reported in the rest of Ireland; and also the number in Great Britain during that period; and, if the special means taken by Lord Spencer to eradicate the disease from Dublin have been attended with any success, and if the stringent inspection of cow houses in that city will be continued?

Sir, the number of cases in the Unions of the county of Dublin was 877; in the rest of Ireland 24; and in Great Britain 657. There is no intention of relaxing the special measures adopted by Lord Spencer to eradicate the disease from the Dublin district, as they could not be dispensed with without inconvenience and danger. It is believed that the result will be most satisfactory; but it is hardly time yet to judge of the full effect.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he is aware that the operation of the Registry of Deeds (Ireland) Holidays Act of 1883 has been practically defeated by the action of the Treasury in deducting from the ordinary leave of the clerks a number of days equal to the number of holidays conferred by the Act; and, whether he will undertake that in future the clerks shall enjoy not only the holidays created by the Act of Parliament, but also the same amount of annual leave as they were entitled to prior to the passing of the said Act?

The hon. Member put a similar Question on March 31, 1884, and the hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Courtney) then answered that the object of the Act referred to was to enable this office to be closed on the same days as other offices. The staff now get legally altogether 36 week days' leave in the year, which, in the opinion of the Registrar, and also that of the Treasury, is quite sufficient, and as much as is allowed in analogous positions.

asked the Secretary of State for War, The number of days the Adjutant of the Fusiliers was absent with and without leave from the termination of the training of 1884 to the commencement of the training of 1885, and by whom were the Regimental duties performed during his absence; and, if an immense saving to the Military expenditure of the Country could be effected by dispensing with the services of those Adjutants attached to Regiments where the head quarters are apart from the Regimental depôts?

Sir, the officer referred to has had, since the training of 1884, his ordinary annual leave, and, in addition, has been absent by permission of his commanding officer on certain occasions from Saturday to Monday. There is no record of any absence without leave. During the Adjutant's absence the Quartermaster performed his duties. The Adjutants of detached Militia regiments act as recruiting officers, and for that and other reasons could not be dispensed with without serious inconvenience.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether clerks who have been obliged to serve from ten to fifteen years in provincial offices, and are transferred to the larger offices through the reduction of the clerical staff of the office to which they were attached, or from any other cause, are placed at great disadvantages in may respects in the offices to which they have been transferred, by being made to rank as junior to other clerks with several years less service, but who have been attached to those offices from the date of their appointment; will he state what steps he is prepared to take to assure, as in other branches of the Civil Service, to clerks or others who are transferred from one office to another at the instance of the Post Office Department, or at their own request, a due recognition of their service by granting to them all those rights to which by seniority they are entitled; and, whether it is part of the system to subject members of the lower grades of the Service to loss of revenue on transfer from one office to another without granting them compensation?

As a general rule, I may say that clerks transferred from one office to another enter their new office below those who are already there; but, even so, a transfer is, as a rule, to their advantage, because in the larger offices there are prospects which the smaller ones do not afford. In no case does an officer, by reason of his transfer, sustain loss of income.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether the provisions of the Alkali Act can be extended to gas-works, so that the preventible nuisances arising from gas manufacture may be stopped; and, whether his attention has been directed to the gasworks at Tunbridge Wells, in which the annual production of 600 tons of foul lime and oxide of iron has been abolished?

When the manufacture of sulphate of ammonia is carried on in connection with gas works, that process is under inspection under the Alkali, &c. Works Regulation Act. As regards gas works generally, of which there are about 2,000, the nuisance which occasionally occurs is one that can be dealt with by the local Inspector of Nuisances, and it is not at present considered necessary to extend to them the provisions of the Act referred to. We are aware that at the gas works at Tunbridge Wells the process which is known as the "Cooper Lime Process" has been adopted, this process, like certain others, being intended to assist in the purification of gas.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he would have any objection to lay upon the Table of the House the names of the Medical Officers of the Army who have returned from Foreign service within the last three years, with, the dates of their proceeding on Foreign service again; and, to state the length of Home service of each Medical Officer?

I am not prepared to lay on the Table the Return asked for. It is obviously impossible to convey to the House, in the form of a Return, all the circumstances attending an officer's service abroad, or of the emergency that may in certain cases necessitate the curtailment of his service at home. I may add that, as Secretary of State for War, I hold myself responsible generally that the roster and system of relief are fairly worked.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to undertake the insurance of parcels and packages when in transit through the Post Office, even if these packages include articles of commercial importance, such as bonds, securities, and diamonds; and, if so, on what conditions, and on payment of what premiums, these insurances will be effected; and, whether the same ad valorem Stamp Duty, as is paid in respect of insurances of such packages at the present time when forwarded to the Continent, Channel Islands, or Ireland, will be paid by the Postmaster General to Her Majesty's Treasury?

In answer to my right hon. Friend I have to state that, although the principle of the in- surance of parcels has been settled, the details are still under consideration. Some articles will probably be excepted from the proposed arrangement, the general conditions of which will be that the Postmaster General, who is now legally exempt from liability for loss or damage, will accept such liability without specific payment up to 20s. a parcel, for the payment of 1d. up to £5, and for 2d. up to £10 a parcel. It is not proposed to pay an ad valorem Stamp Duty to the Treasury; but all fees collected for insurance will be paid in as revenue to the Exchequer, and come under Treasury control in the usual way.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the duty of the Dublin Metropolitan Police to make returns to the registrar of the Irish Court of Queen's Bench respecting all warrants lodged in their hands by the Court; whether it is also the duty of the registrar to make half-yearly returns to the Fines and Penalties Office of all fines imposed by the Court; whether the Fines and Penalties Office is subject to the Chief Secretary; and, whether any such return has been made, either by the police or the registrar, in respect of a warrant of the Court dated July 1st 1884, ordering the levy of a fine of £500 on the goods of Mr. O'Brien, M.P., or, failing such goods, his arrest and imprisonment for twelve months; and, if not, whether he will inquire into the reason of the default, and take the necessary steps to insure obedience to the law in the matter of the said warrant?

I believe the practice is substantially as described in the Question. I have already stated that I know nothing of the history of this particular case, and I am advised that I am under no obligation, after a lapse of 14 months, to take action in regard to it. How far the enforcement of such a penalty would ordinarily devolve on the Executive is a point on which I have not particularly informed myself; but if the hon. Member wishes for information I would suggest that he should ad- dress himself to some Member of the late Government, who were in Office at the time, and who, no doubt, were advised as to the legality of their position.

Arising out of the answer to this Question, and two previous replies on the same subject, I desire to ask for your ruling, Mr. Speaker, upon a point of Order, if it be not even of Privilege. I desire to know whether it is not the right of Members of this House to put Questions to Ministers; and whether, in replying to such Questions, it is consistent with his responsibility, or respectful to the House, for the Minister so interrogated either to refuse to answer, unless he be precluded from doing so in the public interest, or to give vague and evasive replies, containing none of the information asked for, although it is within his knowledge or readily in his power to obtain?

No question of Order can arise in connection with the point put by the hon. Member. Of course, the hon. Member is entitled to put a Question to a Minister of the Crown; but it is entirely within the discretion of the Minister to give it any answer which he thinks right. It is for him to judge what answer should be given to any Question.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether be can now state the names of the Commissioners in the Royal Commission on Trade Depression; and, whether the Memorandum, to which he referred on Thursday, will be communicated to the House before the end of the Session?

in reply, said, he was afraid, for reasons he gave the other day, that he was not in a position to communicate to the House the names of the Royal Commissioners. The Memorandum to which he previously referred would have to be laid before the Royal Commission before it could be communicated to the House.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not remember that he promised the Memorandum should be laid before Parliament? Does he mean the next Parliament?

I said it should be laid before Parliament. It is impossible that a Memorandum addressed to the Royal Commissioners should be made public before the Royal Commissioners themselves have received it.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has reconsidered his decision with reference to the appointment of a Royal Commission for inquiring into the causes of the decline of the industries of Ireland?

I must abide by the answer which I have already given in regard to this matter. It is a matter which is entirely separate from the subject of the Royal Commission that is to be appointed to inquire into the depression of trade.

asked, whether any stops had been taken to secure a proper representation on the Commission of the main industries of the country both as to employers and employed?

Yes, Sir, such steps have been taken and are being taken.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in the event of his Government being in office next Session, he will consider the necessity of removing, with as little delay as possible, the anomaly in the system of payment of Irish National Teachers, by which assistant teachers are deprived of a considerable part of the salaries to which their classes entitle them, and of maintaining a system under which no assistant in an ordinary National School can receive more than a third-class salary though he may have actually attained to the grade of first-class?

in reply, said, that no doubt this Question referred to a matter of importance. It was, however, a matter of detail in the arrangements of the Board of National Education in Ireland, with which it was not his province to interfere. If, however, any proposal on the subject was brought under his notice by the Board, he should be glad to consider it.

asked the Postmaster General, If it is true that, in November 1882, Mr. C. C. Templeman, agent to Mr. S. C. Armstrong, of 39, Brighton Square, Rathgar, Dublin, did make a joint application and a joint affidavit with John Cullen for the discharge of certain arrears of rent under the Arrears Act, due by Cullen out of a farm held by him in the townland of Toughery, county Leitrim; is it true that the Commissioners sent to Cullen a statement that an order had been made for the discharge of said arrears; is it true that when Mr. Templeman found he was not getting the full amount of arrears, he wrote to the Arrears Court stating that no arrears were due by, Cullen, and that he joined in the application and affidavit by mistake; what was the purport of that letter, and did the Court defer making the order; if the landlord took instant action against Cullen for the recovery of the rent, and did the landlord swear he joined in the application by mistake, and on same occasion, when receipts were produced differing from the rent book, swore the difference was caused by a mistake of his in filing the receipts; is it true that, after he obtained a decree, he threatened to put it into the sheriff's hands for execution till Cullen was induced to sign a bill on the Ulster Bank for the full amount; is it true that when the Arrears Court investigated the case, they found the arrears were due, and made an order for the payment of a certain sum in lieu of said arrears; is it true that money is still lying in the Court in the landlord's name, and that he or his agent will not draw it: and, if the above is true, will the Government allow the money to Cullen, and what action will the Government take with Templeman?

I know nothing of this Question, and must refer the hon. Member to my hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for Ireland.

said, he thought he could answer the Question. A joint affidavit was made, and at first an order was made to discharge the arrears. Afterwards it was discovered that the joint application had been made under a misunderstanding, and this order was rescinded. He knew nothing of the other matters referred to in the Question. It seemed to him that there was I no reason for taking any action against Mr. Templeman.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What is the number of police county Waterford is entitled to as a Free Force; how many of that Force are at present stationed in the county; what is the number of extra police at present quartered in the county; what is the cost of the same for the current half-year; on what grounds is it thought necessary to employ these extra police; have the local magistrates been consulted; and, is it a fact that the number of cases returned for trial to quarter sessions and assizes for the last half-year has been small?

in reply, said, the Free Force of Waterford was 219, of which number 213 were at present stationed in the county. The number of extra, men was 64, and the cost for the last half-year for which the account was made up—namely, to 31st March last—was £1,097. The number of cases returned for trial at the last Sessions and Assizes was small; but it was still considered necessary to give protection to several persons in the county. The subject was brought before the Grand Jury at the last Assizes, and they were satisfied that the extra Force was still required. He should add that the extra Force in that county had been reduced by 40 men since December, 1883.

asked whether the Grand Jury paid anything of the money required; and, also, why the Government could not rely upon the ordinary number of constables, as was done in England?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ire- land, Whether, owing to the difficulty people from the Kilmacthomas Union find in attending revision sessions held in Waterford or Dungarvan, it is intended to hold revision sessions at Kilmacthomas, in compliance with the wishes of the people of that union?

Yes, Sir; Kilmacthomas has been established as a place for holding a Revision Court.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that one of the persons entrusted with the printing of the Supplemental Lists for the county of Armagh is Secretary of the Grand Orange Lodge of the county of Armagh; is the paper, of which he is one of the proprietors, and in which the lists for North Armagh and Richhill polling district in Mid-Armagh were printed, the local Orange organ; is the manager of that paper an Orangeman and Conservative Registration Agent, who acted in that capacity at the last Revision Court held in Armagh; is it true that the Supplemental Lists for the polling place of Loughgall were at least four days before 20th July exhibited publicly on the counter of the shop in which they were printed; did a notice appear in the same paper last Saturday that claims would be filled at that office for Loyalists and Conservatives; were the Supplemental Lists for the Charlemont and other polling districts in Mid-Armagh exhibited by Conservative agents and others in these districts at least two days prior to the 20th of July; is it a fact that there are no ordinary printers to the Grand Jury, and that the work is done by contract, the lowest tender being accepted; was a notice issued by the Secretary to the Grand Jury inviting tenders for so much of the Supplemental Lists as the Grand Jury had control of; were tenders received or a contract entered into publicly; was it illegal for the Secretary to the Grand Jury and the Clerk of the Crown and Peace to enter into a private arrangement for disposing of the work; if so, will a prosecution be instituted; and, will there be any further inquiry into the irregularities above referred to before the printing of the Claimants' Lists is entrusted to the same printers?

I cannot undertake to inquire whether persons are Orangemen or not; but if the hon. Member will name the person he refers to in the first part of his Question I may be able to answer as to known matters of fact. Some of the lists for North Armagh were printed in the office of The Ulster Gazette, which is a Conservative paper. The Clerk of the Crown and Peace informs me that the lists for Loughgall and other districts were issued on the 17th ultimo, and were largely circulated; but he has no means of knowing where they were exhibited after they left his office. The printing for the Grand Jury is done by contract after application approved at Presentment Sessions. I have already explained that no such application could be made beforehand in this case, but that the account for the printing must come before a future Sessions, when the Justices and cesspayers will have full power to allow, disallow, or modify the accounts. The Clerk of the Crown and Peace was bound to have the work executed.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not inform him that they were not Orangemen? He would now ask him whether one of these printers was not Grand Secretary to the Orange Lodge of the county?

I am not supposed to make that inquiry.

I will ask the right hon. Gentleman on what authority he undertook to say that the printers were not Orangemen?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, having regard to the importance of the Twenty-eighth Report of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, and especially to the valuable historical retrospect and tables of accounts therein contained, he will be good enough to obtain, from the Commissioners of Customs, a generally similar restrospective history and set of tables, in order that full details of both these great branches of revenue may, as nearly as possible, be simultaneously laid before the public?

I have been in communication with the Commissioners of Customs with regard to my hon. Friend's suggestion, and I hope it may be found possible to prepare some kind of Report on the lines of the recent Inland Revenue Report. But it will, of course, take some considerable time to prepare.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, having regard to the increase of the dues on merchandise agreed to and put in force by the Sligo Harbour Commissioners, in compliance with the desire of the Treasury, and the new bye-law adopted by the Board enabling them to increase the charge on vessels using the new moorings from 1½d. to 3d. per ton, by which changes it is estimated the revenue of the port will be increased by £600 per annum, the Treasury will grant, on the security thus improved, the further loan applied for by the Commissioners in their memorial of the 25th ult., and so enable them to continue without intermission, and complete, in the course of a year, the improvement of the harbour, which will otherwise have to be suspended for a time, and then proceeded with only as accumulation of revenue may allow?

Sir, the application for a further loan in this case came as a surprise upon the Government, having only been introduced by the Harbour Commissioners at the last stage of the correspondence. The Harbour Commissioners have not furnished the Board of Works with the usual statement as to the security they have to offer; but an opportunity will be afforded them to rectify this omission. On their present information, the Treasury are advised that the security is not sufficient to warrant a further loan to the desired amount. The repayment of the instalments upon the principal they have postponed for five years, and that concession should give the Board an immediate surplus of funds.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, at the Extraordinary Presentment Sessions held in Letter-kenny, under "The Relief of Distress Act, 1880," the inspecting officer of the Board of Works cautioned the court as to the extent to which they might approve of public relief works for the parish of Raymunterdoney, inasmuch as a loan of £800 had been approved of to Mr. Wybrant Olpherts for the purpose of giving employment to the distressed people under the one per cent land improvement loan, and whether the sessions did not therefore limit the public works approved of in that locality; whether it is a fact that such a loan of £800 was only issued to the extent of £320, so that the contemplated employment was not given, although it was on the faith of the inspecting officer's statement that it was to be given that the public works were curtailed; whether it is a fact that even the £320 issued was not expended in giving the promised employment, and that no such drainage works, subsoiling, stone wall building, or fencing was carried out in the manner approved of, but that only a small portion of the sum issued was so expended, and very little of the employment promised to the poor given; whether it is true that the Land Improvement Inspector for the district, Mr. Edmund Murphy, was or is now the agent to the adjoining Ards estate, upon which the other loan specified in Parliamentary Return 263 was approved, and whether his son, an inexperienced young man with no special qualifications as a surveyor, was or is sub-agent upon the said Ards estate, and was also, or is, a Land Improvement inspector under the Board of Works; whether they are both magistrates of the same Petty Sessions district as Mr. Olpherts; whether either or both, father or son, have certified the approval or expenditure of all or any of the loans specified in said Return; and, if so, for what expenditure; whether Mr. Wybrant Olpherts had paid up to the date Return 263 was called for the amount then due upon the said one per cent loan; whether he will have an independent survey made, and an inquiry upon oath instituted as to the expendi- ture under these loans; and, can he state what became of the difference between the sums issued and the sums expended?

(who replied) said: I will do my best to answer the numerous points raised in this Question, so far as they are known to the Department which I represent. I have no information as to the action of the Extraordinary Presentment Sessions, or as to the statements made to them. Only £320 was issued to Mr. Olpherts out of the sanctioned loan of £800, the reason being that the time allowed under the Act for execution of the works expired before a further instalment was applied for. Out of this smaller amount £285 was formally certified to have been expended, and the Board of Works are satisfied that the whole of the balance and more was expended on drainage and other works employing labour. But, as doubts have been thrown upon the correctness of this view, an officer of the Board will visit the place at an early date, and will form an independent judgment upon the facts. Mr. E. Murphy and Mr. J. F. Murphy were temporary Inspectors under the Relief of Distress Acts, but I believe are no longer in the service of the Board of Works. The former certified to the expenditure under the loans to Lord Leitrim and Mr. Olpherts; but I have no information as to other occupations of either gentleman. Mr. Olpherts has paid the rent-charge on account of his loan to the last gale day.

Will the calculated date of the visit of the Board of Works representative be made known, so that the ratepayers may be able to be represented on the occasion of the inquiry.

Yes, Sir; Notice shall be given.

asked the Postmaster General, What reply has been given to the Memorial praying for a Sunday mail to Achill Island; and, whether, as the convenience asked for would serve a district extending over thirty miles, and convenience a population of 20,000 people, the facilities demanded can be granted?

The Memorial for a Sunday post to Achill Island was refused on the ground that the weekday service was only maintained at a cost considerably greater than the correspondence, according to the usual rule, would warrant, and that there was no surplus revenue available to cover the cost of a Sunday service. I regret that, the circumstances remaining unaltered, I am not prepared to depart from the conclusion arrived at.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether the sorters employed in the Irish Mail trains are in receipt of eight pence per hour promised by the late Postmaster General; whether it is a fact that he promised that this allowance would be made without any deductions for Sundays; and, whether this promise is being observed at the present time?

The hon. Member's Question, if I understand it aright, refers to Sunday duty in the travelling post offices in Ireland. The travelling sorters in Ireland, excepting those between Dublin and Cork, are paid, under certain limits, for all work done on Sunday at the rate of 8d. for every hour in excess of eight hours in a month of four Sundays. The sorters between Dublin and Cork are excluded from this arrangement, because their rates of remuneration are already exceptionally high.

asked, whether the promise made by the late Postmaster General (Mr. Shaw Lefevre) had been carried out?

said, he know nothing of that.

said, he would remind the noble Lord that this was a portion of the Question on the Paper.

I will inquire into that particular point.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he will kindly inquire whether any steps have been taken to alter the times for meals of the gentlemen cadets of the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, especially in regard to the interval of six hours and twenty minutes between breakfast and luncheon, from 7.55 a.m. to 2.15 p.m.?

In reply to this Question I will make a quotation from the Report of the Board of Visitors, which I have this day presented to the House—

"The Board were much gratified to notice that they (the cadets) did not display to any extent the pale and jaded appearance they showed last year. On the contrary, they looked smart, and presented generally a bright and healthy look. The improvement may, to some extent, have been caused by the entire change which has taken place in their dietary. A complete alteration has been made in this respect; and in place of breakfast at 7 A.M., early lunch at 11.30, and dinner at 2.15, a cold meat luncheon at 1.15, and a very good late dinner at 7.15, are provided for the cadets, the breakfast hour being now at 7.30 A.M."

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether Her Majesty's Government have yet considered the question of completing the Suakin-Berber Railway, and the communication by steamers between Berber and Khartoum, with a view to opening out the commerce of and conferring the blessings of civilization upon Central Africa; and, whether they will be prepared at proper times and seasons to proceed with and carry out that policy?

There is no immediate intention of proceeding with the railway towards Berber; indeed, I may remind the hon. Member that a considerable part of both plant and material have been brought back to this country at great expense. The remainder of the Question has reference to a subject of far greater magnitude than could be dealt with in any ordinary answer to a Question.

I wish to ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will advise the Auditor General to charge the Members of the late Administration with the expenses of this foolish fiasco?

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether his attention has been called to the following extract from a Letter, dated 8th July, received from a young officer stationed at Suakin, and published in the newspapers:—

"Behold the average temperature of the last fortnight in a mess hut, with double roof and sides: maximum, 110 39° Fahr.; minimum, 91 46° Fahr. We have a death every day nearly from sunstroke, heat, apoplexy, or typhoid. I am very well but for a feeling of general limpness, which we all experience. Heaven prevent us from an autumn campaign. The last straw—one ice ship disabled, the other ordered off—no more ice from to-morrow. Sick percentage—European, 20 per cent.; Indian, 16 per cent. The place is not fit for a dog to live in;"

also asked, What number of British Troops, Egyptian Troops, or Indian Troops, still remain at Suakin; whether it is intended by the Government that they shall remain there permanently, or when they will be withdrawn; what is the state of health of the garrison now at Suakin; and, what policy Her Majesty's Government intends to pursue with regard to that place?

The recorded temperature at Graham's Point, Suakin, from the 4th to the 10th of July inclusive, averaged 97 8 degrees at 9 A.M. and 102 4 degrees at 3 P.M. AS regards sickness among European troops, the percentage for the week ending July 3 was 12 4, and for the following week 16 7, which included invalids sent home. During the same weeks the deaths were 12—namely, six from enteric fever and six from sunstroke. There were no Returns received here as to the Indian troops. I have received a telegram showing how matters stood on the 23rd of July. The British strength was 930, of whom 133 were sick, showing 14 3 per cent; health indifferent; prevailing diseases, fever and nervous exhaustion from heat; enteric fever much less; weather cooler during last few days, health consequently improved, but varies with temperature. Native troops—Strength, 2,405; sick, 161, giving 6 7 per cent; health fair. Steps are now being taken for the immediate relief of the European troops, and no more will be retained at Suakin than are indispensable for the defence of the place.

asked as to the steps being taken to relieve the Bengal troops, who were suffering great hardships?

in reply, said, steps were being taken to relieve the Indian troops in the month of October. The Sikh Regiment would certainly be relieved then; but he could not then say whether the 1st Battalion of the Shropshire Regiment would leave Suakin altogether, or whether part of it would be sent to Cyprus, and then go back to Suakin.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's present Government has taken, or intend to take, any steps to induce the Porte to carry out the reforms in Armenia which were made obligatory upon it by Article 61 of the Treaty of Berlin; and, whether, since the conclusion of that Treaty, the Powers have, as stipulated, received any communication from the Porte respecting the application of those reforms; and, if not, whether any instruction on the subject will be given to the Right honourable Member for Portsmouth on the occasion of his intended mission to Constantinople and Cairo?

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's Government have taken, or propose shortly to take, any steps to recall the attention of the Ottoman Porte to the engagements it contracted by the sixty-first article of the Treaty of Berlin, to introduce various reforms into the condition of Armenia, and to press upon it the importance of fulfilling those engagements; and, when further Papers relating to Armenia and Asiatic Turkey, in continuation of Turkey, No. 6, 1881, will be presented to the House?

In reply to the Question of the hon. Member for Wicklow (Mr. M'Coan), I have to say that Her Majesty's Government have not had time to examine the position of this question sufficiently to enable them to take any action in the matter at present. Correspondence has taken place between the British Government and Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople as regards the latter part of the Question of the hon. Member. The matter is one which will not be lost sight of by Her Majesty's Government; but it is not in the interests of the Public Service to state now whether the right hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff) will receive instructions upon the subject or not. In answer to the Question of the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Bryce), I have to say that Her Majesty's Government have had no favourable opportunity since their accession to Office of bringing the question before the Porte; and it must be borne in mind that there are other Articles in the Treaty of Berlin, besides the 61st, securing benefits to Turkey which have remained in abeyance. With respect to further Papers, Her Majesty's Government have not had an opportunity of examining the Correspondence with sufficient care to enable them to state whether or not they will be presented at present.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If his attention has been drawn to the fact that in Ireland a large number of those who deal in spirits and beer deal also in groceries and soft goods, and that often but a fraction of the space of the shop is used for the sale of liquor; if, in such cases, the licensed victuallers, instead of being rated for Licence Duty in proportion only to that part of the premises devoted to the sale of liquor, Duty is often assessed as if the whole shop were devoted to the sale of liquor; and, if he would give directions that the licences should, in mixed shops, be proportioned to the value of that part only which is used for the sale of liquor?

in reply, said, he believed that, as a fact, it was not uncommon for grocers' shops in Ireland to be used in the manner described in the Question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman; but he thought it was very doubtful whether it was desirable to do anything that would tend to increase that practice. He might state it was the rule, not only in Ireland, but throughout the United Kingdom, that the Licence Duty was fixed with reference to the annual value of the whole of the premises, and there would be a practical difficulty in adopting the change suggested in the Question.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether any, and, if any, what arrangement has been made to accelerate the Mails to the Western Islands?

in reply, said, that the subject was now under the consideration of the Treasury.

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether there is to be a public competition for the design of the contemplated statue to the late General Gordon, or a restricted competition amongst a carefully selected list of sculptors; or, on the other hand, whether the work is to be given by the Government to some one sculptor on its own responsibility?

The question of the best way of obtaining designs is still under consideration, and if the hon. Member will favour me with his views on the subject, I shall be very glad to confer with him. Whatever plan is ultimately adopted must, of course, be so entirely on the responsibility of the Government.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would undertake that no definitive steps should be taken for the erection of the statue until the next Parliament had met?

I certainly will not give any such pledge.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Irish Government are aware that in North Antrim, and in other parts of Ireland, claimants and other persons interested in the registering of Parliamentary voters find it impossible to obtain from clerks of the peace and clerks of unions the information and facilities directed by the Irish Registration Act of the present Session to be afforded; and, whether, considering the urgent pressure of time, the Irish Government will immediately direct the attention of the officials concerned to the duties cast upon them by the Statute with regard to supplying forms, and to the inspection and sale of lists, and will warn them of the penalties of fine and dismissal attending violation or neglect of duty? The hon. Member said, further, that he washed to put a further Question on the subject, which was one which concerned not only Antrim, but all other parts of Ireland. The Notices which should have been supplied on the 22nd of last month had not yet been produced; and he wished to ask, firstly, whether penalties of fine and dismissal would not be imposed upon the defaulting officials; and, secondly, whether the claims of the voters would not thereby be invalidated? He would ask also, whether, under the circumstances which he had mentioned, the period for inspection would not be extended beyond the statutory period?

In answer to the hon. Member, so far as I know, no complaints on this subject have reached the Government, and I believe the officials are fully aware of the duties incumbent upon them under the Statute. The latter part of the Question of the hon. Member clearly has reference to matters of fact, and no such facts have yet been brought before me.

As this is a matter of extreme importance, I must put a Question to the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland. Has he any communication to make as to why the lists were not published on the 22nd of last month; and, will the Irish Government take any steps to hold the officials responsible for that fault? I will also ask whether the specified time for establishing a claim will not be extended until the 4th of August—to-morrow?

in reply, said, that he would be prepared to reply to-morrow.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether any Despatch was received from Sir Herbert Stewart, after the Battle of Abu Klea, giving an account of the behaviour of the Troops under his command; and, if such Despatch was sent and received, whether he will lay it upon the Table of the House?

The hon. and gallant Baronet will find the despatch in the Egyptian Papers, No. 9, at page 4.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the attention of the Irish Government, or of the Irish Judiciary, has been drawn to the fact that Mr. Frederick Falkiner, Q.C., Recorder of Dublin, in sentencing a grocers' assistant, said—

"He believed there was an idea existing among grocers' assistants that they could keep to themselves their employers' money;"

I do not know whether this quotation is correct or not. The Recorder is a Judge of independent position, and the Executive Government and the Lord Chancellor have no power or right to question or impugn the language in which a Judge conveys his decisions.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he has observed the very long periods for which certain line battalions have been kept on foreign service, especially the 1st battalion Royal Irish and the 2nd battalion East Surrey, each of which regiments has now two battalions abroad; and, if he will direct that arrangements be made for their early relief?

The two battalions referred to will be among the first to come home whenever the garrison of Egypt can be reduced.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is true that Briggs was tried at Leicester Assizes last November, convicted of starving his wife to death, and sentenced to twenty years' penal servitude; whether the medical evidence given at the trial was found on further inquiry to be erroneous and misleading; and, whether Her Majesty was advised to pardon the unfortunate man, as innocent?

in reply, said, that he believed Briggs had not been pardoned, but was released on licence.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he is aware that, in the more remote provinces of Egypt, the arbitrary and capricious use of the kourbash still continues; that no progress has yet been made in reforming the system of forced labour; that the peasantry are still compelled under the lash to excavate canals with their fingers; that neither tools nor food nor shelter are provided for them; that no steps have been taken to deal with the evils of village usury, or to emancipate the peasantry from its baneful consequences; that these and other reforms necessary for the development and prosperity of the Country have remained in abeyance owing to the bankrupt condition of the Egyptian Treasury; and, whether, now that the financial difficulties have been surmounted, Her Majesty's Government are prepared to press forward all urgently needed reforms, and to win thereby the good-will of the Egyptian people?

after thanking the hon. Member for sending him communications containing information on the subject, and also reminding him of some answers which were given by the late Government with regard to this subject, said, he could find no record at all in the Foreign Office which corroborated in any way the statements in the Question of the hon. Member.

asked the Secretary to the Board of Trade, If he will lay upon the Table Copy of any Communications which may have been received at the Board of Trade, from Shipping or other Associations, protesting against the proposed issue of evidence given on behalf of the Board of Trade before the Royal Commission on Loss of Life at Sea, until the evidence on the other side of the question be also fully taken?

In answer to the Question of the hon. Member, I have to say that communications have been received from the General Shipowners' Society and the Hull Incorporated Chamber of Commerce and Shipping, protesting—

"Against the publication of the ad interim Report of Evidence taken before the Royal Commission on Shipping, on the ground of its ex parte character, the Board of Trade case having been presented and but a small portion of the Shipowners' reply having been as yet heard."

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Infant Department of the Model School of the district of Kilkenny has not been amalgamated with the Female Department; whether the Model School Farm of the same district has not been surrendered, and agricultural training and teaching has not ceased; and, why the Model School appears upon the face of the Estimates for Public Education this year in its normal aspect?

In answer to the hon. Member, I have to say that the Kilkenny Model School only appears on the face of the Estimate for the amount required for the boys' school, and the amalgamated girls' and infants' school; no charge, therefore, appears in the Estimate for the model school farm which has ceased to exist.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the case that a high hoarding has been erected around the dispensary house in William Street, Derry, in such a manner as to obstruct the public view of the lists there exhibited of persons returned as entitled to be registered under the Representation of the People Act; and, whether measures will be taken to have the obstruction removed or the lists better displayed?

I have made inquiries and cannot find that there is any foundation for this statement. On the contrary, I am assured that there is not, and has not been, any such obstruction as that indicated.

asked the Vice President of the Council, Whether it is true, as stated in a local paper, that the Government have made up their minds to give an additional grant to the College of Aberystwith; and, whether they have made provision for giving the increased grant in the present year?

in reply, said, that the subject referred to in the Question was under the consideration of the Government, and he was not yet in a position to announce the decision at which they had arrived.

I desire to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he can inform the House what Business will be taken to-morrow?

I think the principal Business to-morrow, if we finish the Committee on the Criminal Law Amendment Bill this evening, as I hope we may, and take a stage of the Secretary for Scotland Bill, would be the Irish Land Purchase Bill, and the Federal Council of Australasia Bill.

asked when the Criminal Law Amendment Bill would be taken on Report?

I should hope on Wednesday.

asked whether the Government intended to take any other Business on Wednesday?

Wednesday is now a Government day.

asked, If the Government intended to give the names of the two new Commissioners to be appointed?

in reply, said, he could not give any undertaking on the subject yet.

said, that, seeing the right hon. Gentleman the late Home Secretary (Sir William Harcourt) in his place, he wished to put a Question to him with reference to his statement on Friday night, that he knew nothing of the prosecution of the Jeffreys' case, that it was not conducted by the police, but by the local authorities. He (Mr. Callan) wished to ask, Whether it was not the fact that the local authorities— namely, the Chelsea Vestry—took no part in that prosecution any more than the Home Office? He also asked, Whether a representative from the Home Office did not attend on the third occasion at the Police Court; whether he did not make a report to his superiors; and, if so, what was its nature; why did the late Home Secretary not direct the Public Prosecutor to intervene in that scandalous and abominable case; whether the right hon. Gentleman still adhered to his statement that Inspector Minahan was dismissed for insubordination; and whether he had seen the letter in The Pall Mall Gazette, in which Inspector Minahan stated that he was dismissed for describing Mrs. Jeffreys's house as a "brothel for the nobility?"

in reply, said, it was impossible to carry all these Questions in one's head; but he should answer, as far as he could. He answered the points very fully the other night when they were raised in the debate. He did not state that the prosecution in the Jeffreys' case had been conducted by the Local Authorities. On the contrary, he specifically stated that it was conducted by a Society with which Mr. B. Scott, the City Chamberlain, was connected, being one of its leading members, and that they were responsible for the conduct of the prosecution, which the hon. Member described as disgracefully conducted.

interposing, denied that he had so described the prosecution. He had asked why the Public Prosecutor had not intervened in such a scandalous and abominable case? He cast no reflection on the prosecution.

said, he saw no reason to interfere. The prosecution was conducted by persons who had a right to do so, and he saw no reason to interfere. An attack had been made on the police in this matter by Mr. Minahan, who stated generally that they were in connivance with the owners of these houses. He should read to the House a paragraph from the Report of the Chelsea Vestry at exactly the same period of 1883–4. It was headed, "The disorderly houses at Chelsea," and was as follows:—

"The committee are unable to estimate too highly the services which the police have continued to render them in their investigations. The ready attention, the discriminate action, the painstaking observation, and the thorough reports with which the committee have been favoured by the Commissioners and the local officers have enabled them to continue the administration of a wholesome, and, indeed, valuable check to a nefarious trade, which, but a few years since, endangered the moral tone and reputation of the parish."

gave Notice on the Appropriation Bill to call attention to the conduct of the late Home Secretary with reference to the Jeffreys' case and other cases.

said, it was hoped that the Act reducing the price of telegrams would come into operation on the 1st of October.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in view of the strong opposition on the Royal Commission itself to the proposal as to the prison sites, the Government will persevere with the clauses on that subject?

in reply, said, that was a Question for his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, who had charge of the Bill. He would, however, remind the hon. Gentleman that the Bill was the Bill of the Royal Commission rather than of the Government.

said, he would then ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with regard to the clauses of the Bill relating to the sale of prison sites, Whether he is aware that that particular recommendation of the Royal Commission was dissented from by a strong section, headed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon (Mr. Goschen); and, whether, in that case, the Government will continue to persevere with those clauses, which will inevitably lead to prolonged discussion?

said, he wished to draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the fact that the Bill was now blocked by a very active Member of the Royal Commission.

When the hon. Member who has just spoken rose I thought he was about to ask a Question with reference to Clause 13 of the Bill, in which I know he takes a great interest. I have to say that that clause will be considerably modified. As to the Question of the hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Courtney), it seems to me that the clauses relating to the prison sites, although they appear hard to some people, are really one of the greatest benefits that could be conferred upon the people of London, and I, individually, should be very sorry to see them struck out.

asked, with reference to the statement that the negotiations with regard to the Egyptian Loan were suspended when the change of Government took place, When the Correspondence would be distributed?

in reply, said, the intervention of Saturday—a short day with printers—Sunday, and the Bank Holiday, might cause delay; but he hoped the Papers would be in the hands of Members by Wednesday morning.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he was to understand from a previous answer that Her Majesty's present Government did not see their way to press forward the reforms in Egypt, which they were led to expect would follow when the finances of Egypt were restored to a proper condition?

said, he did not say anything about that. He was asked about the kourbash, and other Questions of that kind, and he did not mean to lead the House to understand that the reforms which the late Government thought necessary would not be pressed on the Egyptian Government by Her Majesty's present Government.

said, it was not quite clear from a previous answer of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that he had definitely fixed Wednesday for the Report of the Criminal Law Amendment Bill.

in reply, said, that he could not make a definite promise. He could only say he hoped it might be taken on Wednesday.

asked whether the third reading of the Appropriation Bill would be put down for Thursday?

asked whether, seeing the important Business before the House, the final stage of the Bill could not be postponed for a few days?

I hope it will not be necessary to do that. I remember the promise I gave the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere), and I shall be careful not to take the third reading until the Egyptian Papers are circulated. If circulated to-morrow, as I hope, we may ask the House to take it to-morrow.

said, they had been circulated that morning.

said, he had not been aware of that fact. He could not say whether the Bill would be taken to-morrow or Wednesday; but, at any rate, it would be taken at a convenient hour.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he would give facilities for proceeding with this Bill?

I am afraid I cannot see my way to give a favourable answer at present; but I am aware that the Bill is favourably regarded by hon. Members in all quarters of the House.

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in view of the lateness of the Session and the importance of the subject, he will take the Labourers (Ireland) Bill to-night, even at this late hour?

I think the time will be fully occupied by the Criminal Law Amendment Bill. I would like to be able to take the Labourers (Ireland) Bill, as I think it an important matter.

I wish to ask the Government when they intend to proceed with the Labourers (Ireland) Bill. It has been on the Paper of the House since the beginning of the Session. Also with regard to the Lords' Amendments to the Poor Law Guardians (Ireland) Bill—the Amendment containing the proxy vote, and allowing the ex officio members to retain half the seats at the Boards—I wish to ask the hon. and learned Attorney General for Ireland, what action does the Government intend to take? If those Amendments are agreed to, the Bill may as well be dropped.

asked for Notice of the Question.

In the meantime, can the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer say anything about the Labourers Bill?

I am afraid I cannot say more than I have already said.

In consequence of the great anxiety that exists in all parts of Ireland and amongst the Irish Members with regard to the Bill, I would like to put one Question more to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, first premising, if I may be allowed to do so, that there was no action of the new Government which gave so much satisfaction in Ireland as their announcement of their intention to take up the Bill. The Question I wish to ask is, Whether, as Irish Members of all Parties for the most part remain here till the hour at which the House rises, there would be any practical inconvenience in taking the Bill at any hour, as there will always be Representatives here of all sections of the Irish people?

I cannot answer that Question without previous communication with my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary for Ireland on the subject. I may, however, say that I have no intention of dropping the Bill.

I beg to give Notice that I shall resist further progress with the Appropriation Bill until the Labourers (Ireland) Bill has passed through the House.

said, that in view of the assurance formerly given, that they would receive proper time for the discussion of the Secretary for Scotland Bill, he would ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer after what hour he would not take that Bill that night?

I am afraid that is a Question I can hardly answer.