asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is the fact that officers commanding-Volunteer Regiments are refused permission to purchase accoutrements and stores which, although condemned as unfit for the Regular Forces, are serviceable for the Volunteers; whether such accoutrements are sold by auction for a trifling sum, and are regularly bought up by certain Jewish firms to whom Volunteer Officers who inquire for them are referred; and, whether, by this means, the cost of such articles to Volunteers is raised by nearly 600 per cent?

Accoutrements returned by the troops are in a very bad state, as a rule, and they are not sold until those which are considered worth repairing are picked out for issue to the Militia. The remainder are sold in large lots, and realize very small prices. I doubt very much whether, even with the most careful picking out, any of them would be found to be of use to the Volunteers. But I will undertake to look into the matter.

asked, Whether it was not the case that Volunteer officers wishing to purchase such articles were referred to the dealers to whom they were sold?

I am not so informed; but I will make inquiries.

asked, Whether it was not true that a great deal of the clothing sold was actually new, and had never been used by the troops at all; whether the stores were not brought from the different depôts to Woolwich, instead of being offered for sale in the neighbourhood of the depôts, where probably a better price would be given; and, whether the stores were not all sold in one or two large contracts, so as to shut out competition?

asked for notice of the Question.

said, he would call attention to the matter in Committee of Supply.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether between 1859 and 1870, about 1,300 workmen were entered at Enfield and in the arsenal at Woolwich; whether, on the recommendation of the War Department, the Treasury, under the Superannuation Act of 1873, did, on the 4th of March, 1874, declare by Schedule that 829 of these workmen were entitled to the benefit of "The Superannuation Act, 1859," but omitted the remainder of such workmen in consequence of a War Office Circular dated the 17th of December, 1861; whether General Dixon, the Superintendent at Enfield, has expressed his belief that such Circular was not made known to the workmen, nor even sent to Enfield, until 12 years after its date; whether, at Woolwich Arsenal Carriage Department, the said Circular was omitted from the bound book of Circulars and from the Index, but has been pasted therein subsequently; whether, in the printed Rules and Regulations under which workmen were engaged at Woolwich between 1861 and 1870, nothing is mentioned of the Circular of 1861, and that it was act until 1870 that any indication of its effect for the first time appeared; whether, on behalf of the men omitted from the Schedule, it is solemnly asserted that they did not know of any Circular of 1861 until 1870, and that they are prepared to testify upon oath to that effect; whether Her Majesty's Government will grant an inquiry by any Committee of this House, or by any other independent method, into this serious allegation of non-publication; and, whether, if notification to the workmen be not proved previously to 1870, the War Department will recommend to the Treasury that the said workmen (entered before the 4th June, 1870) be admitted to their just rights under the Act of 1873, as in other Government Departments?

Without pledging myself to exact numbers, no doubt many thousand workmen were entered at Enfield and Woolwich between 1859 and 1870. In answer to the second Question, when the Treasury in March, 1874, declared 790 of these men entitled to the benefit of the Superannuation Act of 1859, their Lordships admitted all the claims which had been submitted to them. In answer to the third Question, there is no record in the War Office of any such statement as that referred to in the Question haying been made by Colonel Dixon. In answer to the fourth Question, the Circular of December, 1861, governed the cases of men appointed up to its date, and is not in the book of circulars; but the Circular of August, 1861, which is the regulation applicable to all subsequent appointments and which governs the cases referred to in these Questions, is in its place both in the bound book and in the index. In answer to the fifth Question, there were no such printed Rules and Regulations under which workmen were engaged in the Royal Laboratory until 1870, nor in the Royal Carriage Department until 1872. There were such Rules in the Royal Gun Factories from 1860, but they contained no reference to superannuations. In answer to the sixth Question, the men now claiming do make the assertion referred to. The claims advocated by my hon. and gallant Friend have been fully investigated by successive Secretaries of State, and all agreed that the applicants had no just claim against the public; but I notice that my hon. and gallant Friend will have an opportunity shortly of raising the question in this House.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been drawn to the following report, published in The Daily News of 23rd February:—

"An extraordinary demonstration was witnessed at Miltown Malbay yesterday, when the contents of 260 carts filled with turf, and a similar number containing potatoes, were distributed by the people of surrounding parishes to the families of the 11 men sentenced to a month's imprisonment under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act. Head Constable Bready, who was in charge of the police, ordered his men to draw their truncheons, and, presenting his revolver, ordered the crowds to disperse. The reason for this action is not reported. The people dispersed quietly. Several tons of potatoes were pitted;"

and, whether the facts are correctly stated; and, if so, whether the action of Head Constable Bready is approved by the Executive Government?

(who replied) said: The Inspector General of Constabulary informs me that the demonstration consisted of several thousand persons, with 300 carts, headed by a band. The local band also began to play through the town, followed by a large crowd. The magistrates at Petty Sessions having ordered that no band should be allowed to play in the streets on the occasion of the demonstration, the Head Constable went up to the band and warned them not to continue. Thereupon the crowd rushed upon the police in a threatening manner. The Head Constable considered it necessary to order his men to draw their truncheons, and he drew his revolver and called upon the people to desist. The ringleaders in the disturbance are being prosecuted.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say under what law are bands prohibited from playing through the streets?

Under the law which gives power to the police to take any stops they think necessary to prevent anything likely to lead to a breach of the peace.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether 11 men—namely, Morgan, M'Inerney, O'Gorman, Rourke, Toole, Donnellon, Simon Coghlan, Michael Coghlan, Costello, Kelly, and Meade, were sentenced at Ennis, on the 22nd of February, to terms of imprisonment varying from four months to two months, with hard labour, for refusing to sell turf to the police; whether all these men lived at a distance of about 15 miles from the district in which the police were quartered; and, if so, whether the police had any right to requisition their turf; and, whether any limit is placed on the authority and discretion of the Constabulary in such proceedings?

(who replied) said, the Inspector General of Constabulary had reported that the persons named in the Question had been sentenced to various terms of imprisonment, from two to four months, tome of them for refusing to sell turf to the police, and others for endeavouring to induce others not to sell, the police being Boycotted. None of them lived a distance of 15 miles from the police. Three lived about five miles distant, and the remainder within a quarter to two miles. The police had every right to ask these men to sell them turf, as they had exhibited turf for sale in various parts of the district.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that all these persons had regular customers for their turf in Ennis whom they were in the habit of supplying, and that if they failed to supply these persons with turf, they would have suffered the loss of their custom, a very serious loss to them?

I am informed that that is not the case.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether the police ever asked these men to supply them with turf before, and whether the only object of the police in asking for the turf on this particular occasion was to initiate a prosecution?

I do not know, and I do not think so.

May I ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman whether the police under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act have a right of pre-emption to the turf?

No, Sir; they have only the regular right of everyone else.

asked the Postmaster General, Under what arrangement time signals are supplied by the Astronomer Royal from Greenwich; at what expense to his Department; and whether such arrangement is of a permanent character; and, what charges are made to the public for the supply of time signals; and what has been the amount annually received in respect of them by the Post Office since the arrangement was commenced?

In reply to the hon. Member, I have to state that the Astronomer Royal does not himself supply time signals to the public. What he does is to supply signals to the Post Office by means of wires and apparatus provided by the Department. The Post Office distributes the signals to various Public Bodies and private persons throughout the Kingdom, on the terms and conditions set forth at page 311 of the Post Office Guide. The minimum charge in London is £15, and in the country £12. The gross annual revenue at present is about £1,300; and the amount has varied from about £230 to about £1,400 a-year since the telegraphs were transferred to the State. The arrangement with the Astronomer Royal may, I think, be regarded as permanent.

asked Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, Whether appeals from Resident Magistrates in County Clare have been decided by Mr. William Hickson, Q.C., a gentleman temporarily appointed to act in the absence of the County Court Judge; is he aware that Mr. Hickson is a member of the Dublin Constitutional Club, and that, since his confirmation of the sentences of Resident Magistrates, has attended a meeting of that Body; will the appeal, in the case of the hon. Member for East Clare (Mr. Cox), from a sentence by Resident Magistrates of four months' imprisonment, for a speech last October, be heard by Mr. Hickson; and, can arrangements be made by which coercion appeals shall be tried only by Judges not removable at the pleasure of the Executive?

The County Court Judge of Clare being during the last Session incapacitated from attending by reason of illness, the Lord Chancellor appointed Mr. Hickson, Q.C., as his locum tenens, and that gentleman accordingly discharged all the duties at the last Sessions, including, of course, the hearing of appeals from Resident Magistrates. The County Court Judge is now better, and he has not intimated to the Lord Chancellor that he will be unable to discharge the duties of his office in person at the next Sessions. Mr. Hick-son is, I understand, a member of the Dublin Constitutional Club, and has attended its meetings. He is, I may add, an able and highly respected member of the Bar. In answer to the last paragraph of the Question, I have to state that it would not be possible to make any arrangements altering the statutory provisions as to appeals, which must in all cases of summary jurisdiction be made at the next Quarter Sessions called in the Division of the county in which the conviction has been made.

If a County Court Judge is not able to resume his duties at the next Quarter Sessions, is it not open to the Government to adjourn the appeals to a subsequent Sessions?

said, it was provided by statute that the appeals must be heard at the next Quarter Sessions; and the only thing which could be done by the Government was for the Lord Chancellor, by another statute, to allow them to be heard by the gentleman who was acting for the County Court Judge, as in the present case.

asked, why the Government did not throw this duty on some other County Court Judge?

The effect would be to take another County Court Judge from his own county. That would not get on with the work better.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the inquiry by the Lord Chancellor into the arrangements connected with the holding of County Courts in Suffolk has been brought to a conclusion; and, if so, with what result; and, whether he is able to give an assurance that the provisions of 9 & 10 Vict., c. 95, ss. 5, 6, as to monthly Courts, shall in future be strictly observed, as also the provisions of the County Court Acts relating to the notices of fixtures?

The Lord Chancellor has been unable to conclude his inquiries, as the Judge is at present away on a holiday. The Lord Chancellor informs me that the assurance asked for in the second paragraph of the Question can certainly be given.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any Report on the geographical position of Raiatea, and other Islands in the Pacific, whose independence, notwithstanding the Treaty of 1847, has been surrendered to the French, has been received from Admiral Fairfax; whether the said Islands are in the direct route to America, and contain splendid harbours; and, if he will lay any further Papers on the subject upon the Table of the House?

No Report upon the Islands in question has been received from Rear Admiral Fairfax, and indeed they do not lie within the limits of his command, nor has any such Report been received of late years from any naval officer. Further Papers upon this subject are being prepared for Parliament.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware of the police barracks at Bellaghy being changed to Charlestown, County Sligo; and, if so, would he explain for what reason; whether a Memorial has been sent to Dublin Castle, signed by the traders of Charlestown, against the change; whether he is aware that the barracks at Bellaghy was specially built for the purpose, at a cost of £400, the rent of which has been the principal support of the Widow Calleran since her husband's death; and, whether, under the circumstances, he will cause Bellaghy Barracks to be retained, it being quite close to Charlestown and equally as central?

(who replied) said, the new barracks at Charlestown were more central and nearer the business part. No Memorial had been received against the change, which had been favourably regarded by the ma- jority of the inhabitants. The Local Constabulary Authorities were not aware whether the barracks at Bellaghy were specially built for the purpose; but they represented that the present owner was not solely dependent upon the rent for her support, as she had other house property. The Government, while regretting that Mrs. Calleran should be put to inconvenience, did not feel justified in causing the present barracks to be retained.

asked the Parliamentary Under Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the Government will give military or police assistance for the proposed ejectment of Widow Flood, of Forthill, County Longford, for arrears of a rent judicially reduced; has he seen The Westmeath Examiner of 21st January, containing the following report of the remarks of the County Court Judge, addressed to the agent at Ballymahon Quarter Sessions, in reference to the proceedings against this widow:—

" A tenant whose rent was reduced last October from £15 8s. to £7, was sued for the rack-rent, which drew from the Judge the observation, ' Is it possible, Mr. Bole, that you are going on for the old rent after the Land Commissioners reducing it over 60 per cent? Surely you do not expect to recover these arrears from poor people.' Mr. Bole's reply was that he had no authority from his employer to wipe out any arrears;"

will any remonstrance be directed by the Executive to the landlord in the case, following the precedent of the letter of the last Chief Secretary to the Marquess of Clanricarde; does he propose, on behalf of the Government, to take any steps in the case; and, can he say who is the woman's landlord?

As the hon. and learned Member is perfectly well aware, I am the landlord in the case in question. No application has been made to the Government for military or police in the matter, nor is there any intention to execute the ejectment decree at present. I have seen the newspaper report referred to. Mr. Bole, however, denies that he made the statement attributed to him; on the contrary, he said that he would allow 20 per cent oft the arrear in respect of the old rent, which would have brought it below the Poor Law valuation. The amount in the decree contained half a-year at the old rent only, and two years judicial rent at £7 per annum. The Poor Law valuation of the farm is £12 15s., and, accordingly, an appeal has been lodged against the rent fixed. The tenant, however, has, of course, only been asked to pay the judicial rent from the date it was fixed. The letter to which the hon. and learned Member refers dealt with a proposal for carrying out wholesale evictions; but the writer distinctly contemplated the necessity of resorting to this process when the tenant declined to fulfil Ms legal obligation. As there is no question in this case of wholesale eviction, and as it may be hoped that there will be no eviction at all, there seems to be no parallel between the circumstances under which my right hon. Friend wrote the letter and those to which the hon. and learned Member refers to in his Question.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, If he will lay upon the Table of the House the proceedings that took place in January last in Sydney, in celebration of the Centennial of New South Wales, including the united service held by the clergy and laity of the Church of England and the Presbyterian and Wesleyan Churches, and which was attended by His Excellency the Governor; and, whether he will take steps to secure a permament record of an event of so great interest?

All the Centennial proceedings in Sydney will, without doubt, be fully recorded in the local Press; and any special notice taken by Her Majesty's Government of a particular religious celebration by one or two Churches would be disapproved in the Colony as being inconsistent with the absolute impartiality maintained by Her Majesty's Government towards all religious communities without distinction.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the service was joined in by the Jews and the Roman Catholics?

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that, owing to the present faulty system of charging the duty upon spirits, a loss to the Revenue estimated at from £60,000 to £80,000 per annum is incurred without any corresponding advantage to the trader; whether this defect is well known and acknowledged by the Inland Revenue Department; whether his attention has been directed, to a system proposed by Dr. Derham which, by substituting correct for incorrect tables, and a scientific and accurate instrument for an inexact one, will not only facilitate the work of the officials, but also, by yielding correct results at all temperatures, will give to the Revenue a sum equal to that mentioned above; and, whether, in view of the importance of this subject to the National Exchequer, he will consider the propriety of appointing a Departmental Committee to report on the method suggested by Dr. Derham?

I am informed that it is not the fact that there is a loss to the Exchequer of £60,000 to £80,000 per annum, as suggested by the hon. Baronet, owing to the faulty system of charging the duty upon spirits. No practical defect in the system is acknowledged by the Inland Revenue Department. Dr. Derham's system has been brought to my notice, and the merits of the principle of his instrument are recognized; but his estimate of the increase which would accrue to the Revenue by the adoption of his system is based upon erroneous assumptions, Sikes's hydrometer, which is the legalized instrument for charging the duty on spirits, is not only used by the Customs and Inland Revenue officers, but by the whole of the trade; and I am told that it would be as great a revolution to introduce Dr. Derham's instrument in its place, as it would be to introduce the decimal system in the place of our present coinage. I am also informed that Dr. Derham's instrument is of a delicate character, and not so well adapted as Sikes's hydrometer to be carried about on the rough journeys which the Revenue officers have to go through.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Why the examinations for Lower Division clerkships in the Civil Service, usually held in or about January, May, and October, have been suspended; will these examinations be held in the future, as formerly, at regular intervals; when is it probable the next examination will be held; and, whether in consequence of the delay in holding such examinations, candidates who have been specially preparing for them, and who are now nearing the superior limit of age, will be disqualified if that limit be exceeded at the time of holding the next examination, and be thus deprived of their chance of entering the Public Service, through no fault of their own?

I answered a Question of the hon. Member for North Sligo (Mr. P. McDonald) to the same effect as this one on the 23rd ultimo; but I may repeat that these examinations are only held when required on account of vacancies which cannot be filled by means of transfers from other Departments, and that no date has been fixed for the next examination.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been drawn to a statement in The Times of Monday last, alleging that a Mr. O'Mara, appearing to be High Sheriff of Limerick (City) and also President of the last meeting of the Limerick National League, is reported to have said to that meeting, in reference to the omission of his name from the Proclamation for holding the Limerick City Assizes, as follow:

"He would tell the meeting what would he possible, and that was that he as High Sheriff could keep the Judge from the Court House because, though it might not be known, the Court House and all round it was in the custody of the High Sheriff for the time being, and a wink from him could keep the Judges a long time rapping at the gates before they got in;"

and, if the allegation be well founded, what steps the Government intend to take in view of such threats against the administration of justice by persons holding the honourable office of High Sheriff?

(who replied) said: My attention has been drawn to the statement in the Question; but I am unable to say whether the allegation is well founded or otherwise. There has, however, as yet been no interference with the administration of justice, and the Government do not, therefore, at present contemplate taking any steps in the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he will state the number of persons who were shown upon medical evidence before Coroners' Juries to have died from want and exposure during the year 1887 in London, and in the other parts of England; and, if he can state the number of persons whose bodies were found in the Thames in the same period, with regard to whom Coroners' Juries were unable to find whether they had met their deaths by murder, suicide, or accident?

(who replied) said, that a Return was now in course of preparation showing the number of deaths in the year 1887 in the Metropolitan District, upon which Coroners' Juries had returned verdicts that they were due to starvation or were deaths accelerated by privation. The Coroners' Returns would furnish the necessary information with regard to the other parts of England. As to bodies found in the Thames within the City of London and the Metropolitan District, there would be no objection on the part of the Government to furnish a Return.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether four men from Balliferritter, named respectively Pat Keane, Michael Ferriter, John Devine, and James Higgins, when discharged from Tralee Gaol on the 16th of February, were only tendered 1s. 2½d. among them to defray the expenses of their journey home, over 45 miles of a snow covered road; why was not some more adequate sum offered to these men; and, what is the usual practice in such cases?

(who replied) said: The prisoners named were released on the morning of the 16th February after breakfast. They were not tendered among them the amount alleged, but were each handed 4s. The Governor of the Tralee Prison states it is the practice there to send old men, women, and juveniles home by public conveyance when available; but that as the prisoners in question were all young men, and had voluntarily submitted themselves to imprisonment rather than give bail, he did not consider himself justified in adopting this course in their case.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether it will be possible for a Joint Committee of both Houses to be appointed to inquire into the Sweating System; and, if not, whether the Government will undertake that the Lords Report shall be communicated to the Commons?

I am much obliged to the hon. Member for calling my attention to the matter; but, on inquiry, I find that it is now too late to adopt his suggestion. I will, however, take care that the suggestion made in the latter part of the Question is given effect to.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in reference to the statement on page 18 of the Papers relating to Emigration (1887), wherein it is stated that the amount of money remitted by settlers in the United States and Canada to their Friends in the United Kingdom in each year from 1848 to 1887 amounted to £34,040,564, and from Australia from 1875 to 1887 amounted to £772,909, Does this amount include small postal and money orders; and, if so, is he aware that the poor and middle class people in Australia sent to their friends and relatives in this country during the past two years no less a sum than £700,000 in money orders, in value from 10s. to £10; and, how he reconciles the statement in the Return with the last-earned fact?

The amount of money stated in the Return as remitted by settlers abroad or in the Colonies to their friends in the United Kingdom does not include sums remitted by small postal and money orders. The Post Office, on being applied to by the Board of Trade for the information for the year 1887, stated that they were unable to furnish it. In 1881 and 1882 Mr. Giffen stated, in his Report to the Board of Trade upon Emigration Statistics, that the data with regard to these remittances were necessarily so incomplete that it was doubtful whether it was ever worth while to publish the figures, or whether it was worth while any longer to continue them. I am obliged to the hon. Member for calling my attention to the matter. I think inaccurate statistics are only misleading, and propose to cease the publication of Tables VII. and VII.A in this Return, unless some good reason to the contrary can be shown.

asked the Postmaster General, Has he taken into consideration the desirability of introducing a uniform post-age stamp for Great Britain and her Colonies, and, in fact, every part of the Empire?

I have considered the question referred to by the hon. Member, and I find that a uniform postage stamp for the British Empire is not practicable, mainly because the revenues of the United Kingdom and of her Colonies being separate, most laborious accounts would be required properly to apportion the receipts. There are other objections which I could not conveniently explain within the limits of an answer to the hon. Member; but I may say that they were such as to convince Mr. Fawcett, when he held the Office which I now occupy, that a uniform postage stamp could not be adopted.

(for Mr. CONDON) (Tipperary, E.) asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the printing for the Loan Fund Board at Cashel was formerly done by a local firm; whether by an Order of the Loan Fund Inspector the Cashel Board have been compelled to send their printing to the Dublin Castle printers; whether the work now costs about double the amount for which it was formerly done; and, whether, under these circumstances, he will order that the work be given to the local firm in the future?

(who replied) said, some Members of the Local Loan Fund Board having provided themselves with forms which were not legal, and others which were not uniform, the Board considered it advisable to keep in stock documents, so as to secure that only those which were legal and uniform should be used. No compulsion was used on the Society in the matter; but they, in common with other similar Societies, seeing the advantage to be derived from it, voluntarily adopted the present system of having the printing done; but they were at perfect liberty to discontinue it, if they thought it desirable to do so. Whether the forms printed by the Dublin Castle printers cost more than those printed by local firms he was unable to say.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant for Ireland, Whether an extra police force of two men has recently been stationed in each of three districts of the County of Dublin—namely, Rolestown, Ballyboghill, and Swords; if so, why has this addition been made to the already heavy burden of taxation borne by the people of those districts; and, whether in those districts of North Dublin there has been for years a single outrage, or attempted outrage, of any kind whatever?

(who replied) said, the Inspector General reported that it was the case that the police force in the three places named had been recently increased by two men each; but it was not the case that any additional burden had been thrown on the people thereby. As regarded the last paragraph of the Question, he was informed that during the last seven years there had been six outrages in these districts.

(for Mr. CAREW) (Kildare, N.) asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to a Report in The Leinster Leader of the 25th of February last, wherein it is stated that in the case of the Celbridge Union, in the County of Kildare, the Privy Council granted every Petition lodged against the erection of labourers' cottages in that union; whether they heard the evidence of the objectors and decided thereon, without giving any notice to the Guardians of the Poor, or without giving them any opportunity of disproving the evidence of the objectors; and, whether, considering the difficulties thrown in the way of the erection of labourers' cottages, he will take steps to facilitate the Boards of Guardians in securing dwellings for the labourers?

(who replied) said: I am informed that three Petitions against the erection of labourers' cottages in Celbridge Union were heard before the Privy Council on the 18th of February, who allowed the objections, after hearing fully counsel and witnesses on both sides. The Guardians had both full notice of the hearing, were represented at it by counsel, and their witnesses were examined in the several cases. I cannot allow that any difficulties are thrown in the way of Boards of Guardians in securing dwellings for the labourers in any cases where a feasible and fair scheme is submitted to the authorities.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention had been called to a statement in The Times of the 9th of March, to the effect that 15 members of the Salvation Army in Torquay have been sentenced under a Local Act, entitled "The Torquay Harbour and District Act, 1886," to terms of imprisonment varying from a fortnight to one month, for taking part on the last four Sundays in street processions with instrumental music; and, whether he can inform him in what other places in England besides Torquay any Local Act is in force under which persons could be punished for similar proceedings?

(who replied) said: Yes, Sir; my attention has been called to the facts stated in the Question. The Eastbourne Improvement Act, 1885, has a provision in terms similar to those of the Torquay Harbour and District Act. My hon. Friend will find provisions substantially the same in the Local Acts for Hastings and Carlisle.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether any, and which, police constable received pay in the Metropolis during any part of the month of November, 1887, under the letter and number 98A; and, whether any, and which, of the pay sheets of the A Division for the month of November contains any entry of pay to, and signed for by, any constable against such letter and number?

I am informed by the Commissioners of Police that Sergeant Flood received pay under the letter and number 98A up to November 20, 1887. The pay-sheets of the Criminal Investigation Department contain Flood's name up to November 20 under this number and letter. His signature is on a separate document, as he was abroad.

asked the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Agriculture, Whether a case of cow disease occurring in Wiltshire was investigated by Professor Crook-shank, of the Bacteriological Laboratory, at the request of the Agricultural Department of the Privy Council; whether he arrived at the conclusion that the disease was identical with the Hen-don outbreak, to which the Report of the Local Government Board for 1886 (pp. xiv. xv.) attributed the generation of scarlet fever among the consumers of the milk of the affected cows; whether he expressed a conviction that the disease was in both cases the true Jennerian cow-pox; and, whether he has identified certain micro-organisms (particularly streptococcus pyogenes) as occurring in both instances, and also in vaccine virus, in erysipelas, in pyæmia, and other infective diseases?

(who replied) said: Some months ago Professor Brown was instructed to make an inquiry as to the existence among cows of an eruptive disease of the teats which it was alleged in one case—the Hendon outbreak—had induced scarlatina in man by the agency of the milk. In the course of the inquiry he availed himself of Professor Crookshank's offered assistance in working out the micro-pathology of the affection. In regard to the outbreak in Wiltshire, Professsor Crookshank has stated that he considered the disease was the Jennerian cow-pox. Professor Crookshank has not yet furnished a Report on the micro-organism of the cow-disease. A Report on the whole subject is now being prepared, and will be issued as soon as possible by the Agricultural Department.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home De- partment, If his attention has been called to the case of the Rev. Thomas Maine, a Baptist minister of Ashton-under-Lyne, who, on the 9th of February, was summoned before the magistrates for neglect to have his child vaccinated; whether it is a fact that the summons was signed and issued by Dr. Cork, a public vaccinator for part of the borough of Ashton; and whether, when Mr. Maine appeared, Dr. Cork and also Mr. John Fletcher, a member of the prosecuting Board of Guardians, sat as magistrates on the Bench; whether Mr. Maine raised the objection that two interested persons were sitting in judgment on him; and whether this objection was ignored; and, whether, having regard to the decision of the Queen's Bench in 1879, on the case of "Betts and Co. v. Milledge, Robins, and others," Justices of Weymouth, he will take means to prevent in such cases the possibility of trial by a Bench partly composed of magistrates having a professional or official interest in the success of the prosecution?

I have received a Report from the Justices as to the case of the Rev. T. Maine, of Ashton-under-Lyne. The summons was signed and issued by Dr. Cooke (not Dr. Cork); but he is not a public vaccinator for any part of the borough of Ashton, or for any other Place. Dr. Cooke and Mr. Fletcher (not Mr. John Fletcher, who was Chairman of the Board of Guardians when the order to prosecute was made) sat as magistrates on the Bench when the order to vaccinate the child was made. Mr. Fletcher is, I understand, a member of the Board. Mr. Maine did not raise the objection then. He did so on a subsequent occasion a month later, when he was fined for not complying with the order. On this latter occasion none of the magisstrates present were members of the Board of Guardians. Had he objected on the former occasion, I am informed by the Justices' clerk that Mr. Fletcher would, no doubt, have retired from the Bench. I have already called the attention of the Bench to the Question of the hon. Member and the case cited, and I do not think any further interference on my part is necessary.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether there is an authorised or accredited Agent from the Transvaal Government resident in this country; and, if so, who is that Agent?

The hon. Member for Caithness (Dr. Clark) is Consul General in Great Britain for the South African Republic.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the Irish Land Commission stated that the percentage of reduction granted by them to judicial tenants under "The Land Law (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1887," would only apply to the half-year ending the 1st of November, 1887; whether this opinion was also expressed by Mr. Kisbey, in giving judgment in "Lord Lurgan v. Heaney and others," at Lurgan Quarter Sessions in January last; and, whether Baron Dowse, on appeal from Mr. Kisbey's decision, reversed the judgment against Heaney, and gave the percentage of Land Commission reduction for the whole year ending November, 1887; and, if so, would the Government give proper publicity to the interpretation given by Baron Dowse to the Act of 1887, and have balances refunded to tenants who have only got a half-year's reduction?

(who replied) said: The Land Commissioners, in a Minute which they prepared and circulated in connection with the alteration of rents prescribed by their Order of the 23rd of December, 1887, explained that the revision of rent provided for by the 29th section of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, and by the Order of the 23rd of December, 1887, refers only to the rent payable in respect of the year commencing from the gale day next before the 23rd of August, 1887, and does not effect prior arrears of rent. Neither the Government nor the Land Commissioners are aware of the case referred to; and the Commissioners have not heard that a view contrary to what they have indicated was ever expressed by a judicial person. The hon. Member will probably find, upon inquiry, that the case he alludes to was one which can in no way affect the general principle laid down by the Commissioners, which is in accordance with the explicit terms of the statute.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether complaints have reached him that the overseers omitted to send voting papers to the occupiers in Cavendish Buildings, Clerkenwell Road, E.C., for the election of Guardians last year and the year before; whether the Local Government Board has received a request from one of the occupiers in Cavendish Buildings that they would take steps to prevent the recurrence of this omission for the future; whether they have taken such steps; and, if not, whether they will do so at once, before the next election, which will shortly take place; and, whether they will send a general Circular to the overseers in the Metropolis reminding them to send voting papers to all the occupiers in artizans' dwellings?

In November last one of the occupiers of Cavendish Buildings made inquiry why at the last election of Guardians, which took place more than six months previously, voting papers were not supplied to the occupiers of the buildings referred to. The Board are informed by the returning officer that, so far as he can ascertain, voting papers have always been sent to the occupiers of artizans' dwellings in the Holborn Union who are entitled to vote in the election of Guardians. No complaint in this matter has been made to him or to the overseers by any occupier of these buildings. There are at present no facts before me which show that there is any necessity for any such communication as is suggested.

asked the Secretary for State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to the following statement, which appeared in the Leeds Mercury of Tuesday, 6th March:—

"The brother of Edward George Copley states that the deceased had given him the following account of the Badsworth affray before he died: ' The poachers went away. Illingworth sent me one way, he went the other. When I came in sight of them again they were struggling together. The young fellow (Pilmore) placed the gun on the grass, and then went to assist his mate. When I got within a few yards of them the young fellow and I both made for the gun. He succeeded in getting to it first; and as I rushed at him the gun went off as he was picking it up, before I know where I was;'"

and, whether he has any reason to believe the correctness or otherwise of the paragraph in question?

The man has been respited. Had it been otherwise I should have been unable to answer this Question. It would be impossible for the Secretary of State to perform his duty in the consideration of these cases if, before his decision is announced, he is to be called upon to explain to the House what weight he attaches to this or that statement for or against the prisoner. In the present instance the statement was not evidence at all, but mere newspaper gossip, without any foundation in fact.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he has received the Report of Mr. McTurk, with reference to his recent visit to the Yurnari, at the request of the Governor of British Guiana; and, whether the Government are now prepared to state what action they propose to take with reference to the territory in dispute between Great Britain and Venezuela?

also had the following Question on the Paper:—To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If it is true that the Foreign Affairs Committee of the American House of Representatives has reported, and the House has adopted, the following Resolution:—

"Whereas there are pending questions of disputed boundary between Venezuela and the Colony of British Guiana, and whereas it is alleged that the British Government has made claim for the said Colony to a considerable portion of valuable territory now and heretofore in the possession of Venezuela, and has refused to submit to arbitration the said questions of disputed boundary, it is resolved that the President be requested to send to the House, if not incompatible with the public interest, all documents and correspondence between our Government and Great Britain or Venezuela relating to the said questions of disputed boundary;"

and, whether, Her Majesty's Government having stated that they are not opposed to the principle of arbitration, he will state what stops have been taken, or are about to be taken, to bring about a settlement of the dispute?

I will, with the permission of the House, answer at the same time the Question of the hon. Member for the Montgomery Boroughs (Mr. Hanbury-Tracy.) Her Majesty's Government are not informed that the American House of Representatives has passed the Resolution referred to. The Report of Mr. McTurk upon his recent journey into the Yurnari District has been received; but I am not in a position to make any statement in regard to it, or upon the question of arbitration concerning the territory.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What is the cause of the delay in appointing a day for the sitting of the Sub-Commission in the County Wexford to fix the fair rents; can he name a day for the next sitting; and, will the cases of all the tenants in County Wexford, whose originating notices were served before the 1st of November last, be fixed for the next sitting?

(who replied) said, the Land Commissioners informed him that there had been no unusual delay respecting the sitting of the Sub-Commission for the County of Wexford. The Sub-Commission would commence their sittings in Waterford at Carrick- on-Suir on the 4th of next month, and the date upon which they would open in New Ross would be fixed by their Chairman as soon after that date as possible. The Commissioners stated that it was not the practice, having regard to the length of the sittings in other districts, to fix the date of the next sitting in any other way. He was not aware that there was any unusual delay.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say why there should be any delay? What is the unusual delay?

said, that any delay that was unusual was rendered so by the unusual number of applications, which made it impossible to prevent the business falling into arrear.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What is the explanation of the delays in hearing fair rent cases in Ireland; is he aware that the landlords are taking advantage of this delay to serve eviction notices under Section 7 of last year's Act, for arrears accruing due since the originating notices were served, plus the previous half-year's rent, which destroys the tenant's right to go into the Land Court; can any steps be taken so that at least one Sub-Commission shall be appointed to operate in every county; will the Government compensate in any way tenants whose rights have been lost by these delays; have they seen the observations of Lord Chief Baron Palles, in a case of "Kilkelly v. Brennan," as to the complications that would arise unless the Executive took steps to expedite the hearing of land cases; and, how many fair rent notices have yet to be heard, and what is the average rate per month at which they are being disposed of? He would also ask what remedy the Government were going to apply?

(who replied) said: The Land Commissioners inform me that there is no unnecessary delay in hearing fair rent cases, all the Sub-Commissioners being steadily at work in their various districts. They are not aware whether landlords are taking ad- vantage, where fair rent applications are not disposed of, to serve eviction notices under Section 7 of last year's Act. But they apprehend that the service of such notice would not destroy the tenant's right to have a fair pent fixed if he should redeem. It is their practice not to dismiss an originating notice in cases where an eviction notice has been served, but to adjourn it pending the time for redemption. The Government are at present considering the question of increasing the number of Sub-Commissioners. They are not aware of any cases in which tenants have lost their rights through the non-hearing of their applications. They have not seen the observations attributed to the Lord Chief Baron. There are in all 58,839 fair rent applications now pending in the Court of the Land Commission, this number being mainly due to the Act of last Session admitting leaseholders and attracting a large accession of yearly tenants by reason of the provision which made the judicial rent run from the gale day after the application instead of after the order fixing the rent. The number of cases pending on August 1, 1887, was only 11,075. The average rate per month at which these cases are being disposed of is about 2,000.

If that is the case, does it not follow that it will be a year and a-half before many of them are reached? I would like, under these circumstances, if the Land Commission have furnished the right hon. and gallant Gentleman with the information, an answer as to the relative number of Sub-Commissioners at present, and the number of cases as compared with what was done in 1884. Are there as many Sub-Commissioners now in operation as compared with 1881, when the Land Act was passed?

repeated that the Government were considering the question of appointing fresh Sub-Commissioners, and they were consulting with the Treasury on the subject. The matter would be disposed of as soon as possible.

How many new Sub-Commissioners have there been appointed since the Act of last year?

said, he could not answer that Question.

said, he would ask a Question on the subject.

said, that as the Land Commissioners had denied that that they had absolutely dismissed any of these cases under Section 7, he begged to give Notice that on an early day, or on the consideration of the Vote—if it was taken at an early day—he would call attention to several cases, notably on the Mitchelstown Estate, and in the County of Louth, in which the Land Commission must be well aware that the fact of postponing the hearing of the fair rent applications has resulted in the tenants being evicted.

May I ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman how many such Commissions are working now?

There are 12 such Commissions; I think I am right in saying 12.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he will inform the House what the special arrangements are which he proposes to make to meet the case of Trustees who may have to decide on the question of conversion of Trust Funds?

The Bill enables the Treasury to make Rules prescribing the evidence to be required of a person being a Trustee, and authorizes the Bank to accept and act on the evidence so prescribed, and expressly declares that the Bank is not to be affected with notice of any Trust. This will, I hope, remove the difficulties foreseen by the hon. Baronet. The Bill will be in the hands of hon. Members to-morrow.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he will be good enough to telegraph or write to such of the Colonies as have not yet responded to the Secretary of State's Circular Despatch of September last on the subject of Colonization, and urge them to reply?

Replies have been received from all the Colonies addressed except Newfoundland, New South Wales, Victoria, and Tasmania; and these have been reminded by a despatch dated the 23rd ultimo.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether it is the case that Sub-Postmasters in Ireland have to provide the fittings of their offices out of their small salaries; and. whether it is the fact that they have also to provide the stationery, &c. required for their offices; and, if so, will any steps be taken to remedy this unfair treatment of the Sub-Postmasters?

Every Sub-Postmaster is required to provide an office, with such fittings as are necessary—usually costing very little—as a condition of his appointment, and Sub-Postmasters in Ireland hold their situations precisely upon the same terms in this respect, and are paid upon the same scale, as Sub-Postmasters in England and Scotland. I will make inquiry into the subject raised by the hon. Member's second Question, and shall be glad if I can relieve Sub-Postmasters from such payments in case they appear to amount to an appreciable sum.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a British steamer has been detained by the Local Chinese Authorities at Tchang, near the rapids of the Yangtsze, contrary to the provisions of the Chefoo Convention, notwithstanding that the season for the vessel ascending the river is becoming urgent?

The information that has readied the Foreign Office is not in accordance with the terms of my hon. Friend's Question. Her Majesty's Minister in China has lately been exerting himself strenuously to induce the Chinese Government to sanction the projected voyage of a steamer to Chung King, to which the Government and the British Consul in that district state that there is strong opposition from the Local Authorities and population. Sir John Walsham will continue his endeavours to overcome the hesitation of the Chinese Government.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is true, as reported in a Dublin newspaper, that the Lord Lieutenant, on Memorials, reduced two fines of £10 each, imposed by a Dublin police magistrate, for offences against the Margarine Act of last Session to £2 each?

(who replied) said: It is the case that the Lord Lieutenant, on Memorials, reduced the fines in question as stated. The Act under which the fines were imposed had only come into force on the 1st of January; and having regard to the circumstances in these cases brought under the notice of his Excellency he considered that a substantial reduction of the penalties should be made, and in this the magistrate who tried the cases concurred.

asked, would the right hon. and gallant Gentleman inform the House why, if those people had a right to appeal, they were not allowed to use that right; and why such a remedy as that described had been resorted to in lieu of the right of appeal?

said, that the Act only came into operation this year.

Might I ask why the same course was not taken when the new Law of Coercion came into operation?

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he has received from, the British Medical Association a statement containing an analysis of the opinions of nearly 1,200 Army medical officers, with reference to the recent abolition of relative rank; whether a wide-spread feeling of dissatisfaction has thus been shown to exist throughout the Department; and, whether, under these circumstances, he will bring on Vote IV. of the Army Estimates at a time which will admit of full discussion?

I have received a communication purporting to give the anonymous opinions of several hundred medical officers. These opinions must have been obtained and expressed in a manner altogether in contravention of military discipline. Medical officers, like other officers, have a proper channel through which they can be heard; and I am not prepared to accept any Civilian Association as their mouthpiece. On the general question of rank I can only repeat what I said several times last year—namely, that the status of medical officers is just as it was before; and that, as regards titular rank, they already hold professional titles for which the exchange to combatant titles, without combatant functions, would be a loss of personal influence.

said, he would draw attention to this subject on the Medical Vote.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, When he will be able to fulfil the promises of his Predecessors in the submission of legislation on the superannuation of the Constabulary Forces?

It is impossible to fix a time beforehand; but my hope is to introduce a Bill in the course of the present Session.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, What is the total amount of money to be paid this year for the mail steamers to America and Australia for the call on their services as armed cruisers; the number of vessels so under call; what steps, if any, are being taken to train the officers and men of these steamers in naval warfare; and, have the Government taken into consideration, and with what result, the condition of the Mercantile Marine, with a view to its more complete utilization as a Reserve for the Royal Navy?

the anticipated payment in subventions for 1888–9 is £22,380. This payment is on six ships; but by an arrangement with the owners nine others are at the disposition of the Admiralty for purchase or hire when required. Unless they happen to belong to the Royal Naval Reserve no steps are taken for the training of the officers and men of these ships in naval warfare; but it has been arranged that at least half of the crews should belong to the Royal Naval Reserve in the steamers to America, and another arrangement has been made for the remaining steamers. The pick of the Mercantile Fleet is already on the Admiralty list, and can be requisitioned when required; and by means of the Royal Naval Reserve the services of such portion of its personnel as may be willing to serve in the Navy in the event of war are already at the disposal of the Admiralty. No further development of this principle is at present contemplated.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he would be good enough to inform the House what progress has been made with the Return of Church Revenues granted last Session on the Motion of the Right honourable J. G. Hubbard (now Lord Addington), and when it may be expected to be completed?

(who replied) said: In my answer given on the 5th of March in this House to the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire (Mr. Channing) I explained the great magnitude of the work of preparing this Report, and declined to forecast the date of its completion. I have nothing to add to that reply.

asked, whether any steps had been taken to expedite the completion of this Return?

Elaborate inquiries have been addressed to no less than 14,000 incumbents of benefices, and some 12,000 replies have been received. Many of the replies are imperfect.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the following Memorandum respecting Government advertisements in Ireland:—

"The advocacy of particular opinions is not in itself a sufficient reason for giving or withholding Government advertisements; but the benefit of the doubt should always be given in favour of papers supporting law and order; the fact that a particular paper is Boycotted is strong ground for giving it Government advertisements, and a conclusive ground for not withdrawing them if already given; no Government advertisements must, under any circumstances, be given to any newspaper that violates the law,"

Whether by newspapers not supporting law and order the Nationalist Press is meant; whether his attention has been called to the following statement of the Secretary to the Treasury, made in Committee of Supply last Session:—

"He proposed to go through the list [of newspapers to which the Civil Service Commissioners gave advertisements], and if necessary insert National papers, and he must say at once that they ought to be given a share of the advertisements, so that those who read the newspapers in Ireland to a large extent should have an opportunity of seeing these advertisements;"

and, whether, if the foregoing Memorandum has been issued, and the National newspapers be those to which the Chief Secretary refers, he will, in view of this statement of the Secretary to the Treasury, cause it to be withdrawn forthwith?

(who replied) said: I do not fool called upon to answer any Question with regard to alleged Circulars which must either be forgeries or have been obtained through breach of confidence of some person to whom they were entrusted. In any case I fail to see any inconsistency between the alleged Circular and the statement made by the Financial Secretary.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether all the cement used for War Department Works in Ireland is imported from England; whether he is aware that cement is manufactured in the neighbourhood of Dublin and in Wexford, which is largely used, amongst others, by the Dublin Port and Docks Board and the Irish Board of Works; and, will directions be given to the Royal Engineer Department in Ireland to have tests of these cements made in the presence of the manufacturer's agents; and, if the tests are satisfactory and the price suitable, to favourably consider the use of the Irish material?

(who replied) said: It is not known where the cement comes from which is used in War Department works, as a contractor may get his cement in Ireland or elsewhere, provided it pass the specified tests.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that the Boards of Guardians of several Unions in Ireland have declined to provide any remuneration out of the rates for the compulsory services rendered by Clerks of Unions and Poor Rate Collectors under the Franchise Act of 1884, on the grounds that such remuneration should be provided from Imperial funds; and, if so, whether, under these circumstances, he will consider the justice and propriety of making provision in the Estimates for the payment to these public servants in respect of the duties in question, which they are called on, under penalty, to discharge?

(who replied) said: The question of the remuneration of Poor Law officials in Ireland for their services under the Franchise Act has been for some time engaging the attention of the Government, and the Government intend at an early date to take steps in the matter. They cannot hope, however, to undertake to ask Parliament to sanction remuneration to these officials as an extra charge on the Imperial funds.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether Her Majesty's Government intend to present to Parliament any account of the proceedings of the Conference recently held in Cape Town to determine on common action in reference to Customs Duties, Railway Extension, and other matters of common concern to the States and Colonies of South Africa; and, whether it is proposed that Basuto-land, Bechuanaland, and other portions of South Africa, still under Imperial control or administration, should take part in any common action that may result from the said Conference?

The Report of the proceedings at the Conference at Cape Town has not yet been received; but Her Majesty's Government are not aware of any reason why it should not be communicated to Parliament in due course. No proposals have come before Her Majesty's Government for the inclusion of Basutoland or Buchuanaland in any arrangements for common action that may be adopted; and it is not possible, without further information, to express an opinion upon the point raised in the hon. Member's Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that in the neighbourhood of Castlederg, County Tyrone, a great number of leaseholders are waiting to have their rents adjusted; and, whether he can give any information as to when a Land Court is likely to sit in that neighbourhood?

(who replied) said: The Land Commissioners inform me there are 202 tenants in the Castle- derg Union waiting to have their applications heard, of which probably one-third, are leaseholders. A Sub-Commission will commence its sitting for County Tyrone on May 1. In answering the Question of the hon. Member for South Tyrone (Mr. T. W. Russell), as to the number of Sub-Commissions, I might have added that each Sub-Commission now comprises five members instead of three, as formerly.

I would like to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, whether it is not a fact that there is in the Estimates for this year a reduction in the amount for the Land Commission of £54,000 compared with last year, and that the number of Sub-Commissioners estimated for is 20 less than last year; while, at the same time, there is an extraordinary increase in the number of applications by tenants to have their rents fixed?

Might I ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman whether no Sub-Commission will commence to sit in Tyrone till the 1st of May?

That is the date furnished to me by the Land Commissioners.

Might I ask the Chief Secretary, whether he will give his personal attention to the position the tenants are placed in by the delay in hearing their applications?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury—for this is a most important question—whether in the Estimates for the coming year there is a reduction of £54,000, as compared with last year, in the amount for the Irish Land Commission; and whether there is provision made for the salaries of 20 Sub-Commissioners less than last year; and, whether that has been done by the Treasury in view of the fact that 113,000 leaseholders have entered applications to have their rents fixed?

The answer to that Question is a very simple one. The Land Commission terminates, as hon. Members are aware, by law in August next, and we made provision only up to the date when the Commission would terminate. If the Commission is extended further than that time, of course provision will have to be made for the amount required.

How does that account for the reduced number of Sub-Commissioners estimated for between this and August next?

I do not quite catch the Question.

I wish to ask, whether the fact that the Land Commission, is by law terminated in August next necessitates a reduction in the number of Sub-Commissioners between this and August next?

I am not aware that there is any reduction in the number of Sub-Commissioners.

There are 20 less than last year.

Twenty less than the estimated number, though there has been no reduction in the number of Sub-Commissioners are far as I am aware.

Might I ask, whether or not it is the intention of the Irish Government to continue the Land Commission beyond the date at which it now by law concludes; also, whether that decision was not arrived at before the Estimates were framed; and. if so, whether the Estimates ought not to have been framed upon that decision?

I am not intimately acquainted with the practice of the Treasury in this matter; but I believe that it is not usual to put on the Estimates sums which require Parliamentary sanction before they could be voted. The Land Commission naturally expires on the 1st of August. Of course, before that date the Government will come down to Parliament and ask their views as to how the Land Commission should be dealt with in the future. But until Parliament has given its sanction to the proposals of the Government, or some other proposals, it would be improper to put on the Estimates the additional sums required.

But when the Poor Law Commission had to be extended from year to year it was always the custom to ask in the Estimates for the full amount that was intended to be expended. There is a sound objection, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, to Supplementary Estimates, and I should like to have the view of the First Lord of the Treasury upon that point.

It will be within the recollection of the right hon. Gentleman, I think, that the Charity Commission was continued from year to year. The Charity Commission was only provided for under Statute up to the period for which it was authorized by Statute; and for many years it was necessary for successive Governments to present Supplementary Estimates for the Charity Commission.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman had not, in 1881, proposed a Motion to abolish the Land Commission, and to issue an irresponsible Commission to take its place; and, whether it was intended by the Government now to carry that into effect?

I am sure the hon. and learned Gentleman will see that that is a Question which ought not to be asked. I could not answer it seriously without due Notice.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he can state the number of Civil Service writers who, by reason of age, are able to take the benefit of the alleged concession with respect to age in competing for Lower Division clerkships; and, the number who have actually done so?

I am informed that there are 350 copyists on the Register who, being above 20 years of age, are yet eligible to compete for Lower Division clerkships under the special Rule to which, the hon. Member refers; and that at the last competition 31 did so compete.

asked Mr. Attorney General, Whether there is any reason of a public nature why Motions in the Chancery Division should not be set down in a list as in the other Courts, and in the Chancery Division itself, during the Long Vacation?

In reply to the hon. Member, I have to say that the matter referred to in his Question has often been considered by both the Judges and the Bar of the Chancery Division. There is power in the Court at the present time to make a list of Motions should it be considered necessary in the interests of the despatch of business to do so; but the present system, which enables urgent Motions to be taken at any time, and Motions to be continued from day to day if required, is, in the opinion of the Judges and the Bar, moist conducive to the despatch of business.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, considering the anxiety on the part of the agricultural population to prevent the total extermination of hares, the Government is prepared to give facilities to pass the Hares Preservation Bill at the earliest possible date?

asked the right hon. Gentleman, whether it was not a fact that the ex-termination of hares was not now entirely in the hands of the agricultural population; and, whether the manner in which this Bill had been blocked was significant of the opinion of the House in the direction of restricting that control?

asked, whether the Government were in possession of any information to lead to the belief that, under the existing laws, the total extinction of hares was contemplated?

said, he did not intend to give a debating answer to the two hon. Gentlemen opposite. He could only answer the Question which his hon. and gallant Friend had put to him. He regretted that it had not been possible for his hon. and gallant Friend to obtain a second reading of his Bill. It was a subject that might very well be considered by that House. There were questions equally important that were raised by other hon. Gentlemen; and he was afraid it would not be in his power to give special facilities for one Bill, however important it might be in the judgment of those who supported it.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the fact that the Government have already appropriated nearly the whole time of the Session, and also in view of the fact that the first Notice of Motion which stands on the Order Book for Friday, March 16, involves a direct censure upon a Member of the Government, as well as a grave Constitutional question, the Government will re-consider their determination to take a Morning Sitting on that day?

I was not aware of the fact mentioned by the right hon. and learned Member that the Government have appropriated nearly the whole time of the Session. I am sure the right hon. and learned Gentleman will see that it is the duty of the Government to arrange the Business of the House, so far as it is in their power to do so, having regard to the relative importance of the Business which is before the House; and I think he will not be surprised to hear that the Government are of opinion that the important question relating to the reduction of interest on the National Debt is greater than that of the question to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman refers. It is a matter of the highest importance to the country at large that the question involved in the second reading of the Bill for the reduction of the interest on the National Debt should be disposed of without delay. Therefore, it is impossible for me to comply with the suggestion of the right hon. and learned Gentleman; but I hope ample time will be found to dispose of his Motion.

said, he did not desire to contest the view of the right hon. Gentleman; but he asked for an undertaking that the Government would do as they did for the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere) onFriday last—namely, to make a House at the Evening Sitting.

said, the Government was bound to make a House at the Evening Sitting on Friday next.

asked, whether the Government would promise that at Morning Sittings at this early period of the Session Bills should not be sneaked through?

said, the Government was bound to make the best use of the time at their disposal. So long as sufficient Notice was given of the Business which the Government proposed to take, he thought the hon. Gentleman would see that he had no reason to complain if they availed themselves of every opportunity of forwarding Public Business.

inquired, whether the Government proposed to use the Morning Sitting on Friday for the purpose of passing the Parliamentary Under Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland Bill?

said, it was impossible to say at present.

said, they ought to have Notice not later than to-morrow morning.

I think it is right that I should inform the House that I propose, on Monday next, to ask the leave of the House to introduce the Local Government Bill. It will be the first Order.

Can the right hon. Gentleman inform the House when it is likely the Bill will be printed and circulated?

It is a very heavy Bill; and I think it probable that it will not be circulated for a week or 10 days after I have asked leave to introduce it.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, after the answer he has given, whether he will undertake, as I am quite sure he will, to expedite the planting of the Bill to the best of his ability? because I think I may say it is a very unusual thing for a Government Bill not to be laid on the Table until 10 days after the preliminary statement in moving for leave. The right hon. Gentleman will observe that the country will not be in a position to make itself master of the provisions of so complicated a measure, however able the statement with regard to it may have been, until it is laid upon the Table of the House.

The right hon. Gentleman will understand that Her Majesty's Government have quite realized the great desirability of letting the House have the Bill as speedily as possible after leave to introduce has been given, and I will do all in my power to see that the utmost speed is used in printing it, and I hope that it may be printed within a week at any rate.

asked, whether there was a single instance in which the circulation of a Bill of such importance, which had been so many months in preparation, had been so long delayed?

I cannot answer the Question off-hand; but I am told that it is not unusual for the circulation of a Bill of this magnitude to be delayed for an equal length of time.

May we rely upon having the Bill circulated before the Easter Recess?

Yes; certainly.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, the other day, that he would make his Budget Statement next Monday. Now we are told that the Local Government Bill is to be introduced on that day. When, then, will the Budget be taken?

On this day fortnight.