asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he will explain why No. 16,978, Bombardier Allan Smith, No. 3 Battery, 1st Division, Depot Brigade, Royal Artillery, now residing in Abernethy, Inverness-shire, was discharged, without pension, on the 6th of April, 1866, after serving several years over his first limited engagement; why he did not get the full benefit of the Field Marshal Commanding-in Chief's decision in his case, involving reparation for his imprisonment and other legal wrongs; and whether he will now consent to Smith being supplied, at his own cost, with copies of the documents bearing on his case, but hitherto withheld?

(who replied) said: Smith, the man referred to, was discharged, in 1866, as a time-expired man after a length of service which did not entitle him to a pension, except a deferred one from the age of 50. This was actually granted to him last year. He did receive such benefit as could be given from the Commander-in-Chief a decision; but he refused to continue in the Service, and claimed promotion which, if he had continued in the Service, he might have obtained. The case was fully considered by Viscount Card-well, and the Secretary of State is not prepared to re-open it after so many years have elapsed.

asked the Lord Advocate, Whether a factor's clerk is qualified to hold the office of clerk or treasurer to a District Road Board in Scotland; whether, in the employment of a Road Board, wages earned by labourers at the making and repairing of roads can be appropriated by the clerk or treasurer in payment of rents and arrears due by labourers to their landlord; and, whether earned wages, intended by the labourer to meet his poor rates and prevent his disfranchisement, and left in the hands of the clerk or treasurer to a Road Board for this object, can be otherwise diverted by such clerk or treasurer?

I cannot undertake to answer purely legal points on a bald and hypothetical statement contained in a Question; and, in any view, must decline to aid hon. Members with, professional advice on points of law through the medium of the Question Paper of this House.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If the Income Tax Commissioners have full power to decide within their own districts what amount of deduction may be made for wear and tear of machinery; if the deductions so allowed vary considerably in different districts, even when under presumably similar circumstances; and whether, if it can be proved to his satisfaction that such inequalities exist, he will consider the propriety of amending the law, so as to enable the General Commissioners of Income Tax to call in an expert in cases where the correctness of their decision in this respect is called in question by an appellant?

The General Commissioners of Income Tax and the Special Commissioners are by law empowered to determine what allowance for "wear and tear" of machinery is "just and reasonable" in determining the amount of Income Tax chargeable on the profits of manufacturing concerns assessed by them, and their decision is final. Statements have been made, from time to time, that the allowances granted in different districts are not identical. Premising that uniformity of practice is desirable, it is not thought that the calling in of a valuer would secure it; inasmuch as it is common knowledge that estimates of value made by different valuers of the same property vary considerably. The Local Commissioners of Taxes, being practical men, may, it is thought, be trusted to exercise fairly their functions in this matter; and it is thought they would not object to examine any valuer tendered by an appellant for examination. Moreover, it is open to any taxpayer to elect to be assessed by the Special Commissioners on giving the required notice, should he prefer to go to them instead of to the Local Commissioners of the district.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, How much money was expended in drafting in police and military into Youghal on the 7th of March; and, what ground the Authorities had for supposing that it was contemplated to hold a meeting on the anniversary of Hanlon's death?

(who replied) said: The expenditure of drafting police and military into Youghal on the 7th of March was under £50. The police had received information that a demonstration and a mock funeral would take place; and the Divisional Magistrate himself had also information on the subject.

May I ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, whether the police instituted any inquiry from the respectable citizens of the district; and, whether they were not informed that there was no intention to hold any mooting?

No, Sir. I believe the police made all the inquiries they could; but they certainly would not direct their inquiries to the persons concerned.

Is it not a fact that they wore told no meeting would take place, or would be attempted to be held?

The information the police received stated that that was not the fact.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If Mr. Patrick Brady, a candidate for a Division of the Union of Cootehill, served a notice on the clerk of the Union, requesting him to call upon persons claiming extra votes to produce documentary proof of rental, & c, in support of claims; whether, at a former election, extra votes were allowed to Isabella Johnston and Edward Smith, though their abatements were only temporary; and, whether, at the coming election, Robert Graham, ex-clerk, will be retained by the Local Government Board as Returning Officer, notwithstanding the protests of the majority of the elected Guardians?

(who replied) said: The returning officer did receive the notice referred to, and an extra vote was allowed to Isabella Johnston and Edward Smith on their declaration before a Justice of the Peace showing their respective ratings. It is not the fact that Mr. Robert Graham, ex-clerk of the Union, has been retained as Returning Officer.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he can state the amount voted by the Queen's County Grand Jury for malicious injuries at the Assizes last week; has his attention been drawn to the following account of what took place between the Assize Judge (Mr. Justice Johnson) and the Grand Jury as to 16 alleged "malicious injuries" which the police declared were not "outrages" at all—namely—

"Colonel Garden, as Chairman of the Committee before whom the applications for malicious injuries came, said he wished to draw his Lordship's attention to the unusually large number of applications for compensation for malicious injuries, arising out of intimidation and Boycotting, which came before the Grand Jury.

"His Lordship said he was informed by the respected County Inspector that the county was not only free from crime of a serious nature, but that it was in its usual state of perfect peace and orderliness, with the exception of one part of the county, where some differences existed between the landlord proprietor and his tenants. During his experience it had been often found that 'malicious' injuries were not malicious at all. The county was now in the same orderly and peaceful state in which he found it on his last visit.

"The Foreman said the 16 cases of malicious injuries did not appear in the Constabulary Report, though they must have been brought under the notice of the police.

"The County Inspector said he could only include those cases which were regarded as outrages at the Constabulary head-quarters;"

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been directed to the following report, which appeared in The Freeman's Journal of the 9th instant, of a conversation which took place the day previously in Maryborough, between the Grand Jurors of Queen's County and Mr. Justice Johnson, Judge of Assize:—

"Colonel Carden, as Chairman of Committee for malicious injuries, said he wished to draw his Lordship's attention to the unusually large number of applications for compensation for malicious injuries arising out of intimidation and Boycotting which cams before the Grand Jury.

"His Lordship said he was informed by the respected County Inspector that the county was not only free from crime of a serious character, but that it was in its usual state of perfect peace and orderliness, with the exception of one part of the county, where some differences existed between the landlord proprietor and his tenants. During his experience it had been often found that ' malicious ' injuries wore not malicious at all. The county was now in the same orderly and peaceful state in which he found it on his last visit.

"The Foreman said the 16 cases of malicious injuries did not appear on the Constabulary Report, though they must have been brought under the notice of the police.

"The County Inspector said he could only include those cases which were regarded as outrages at the Constabulary head-quarters;"

(who replied) said: The amount voted by the Queen's County Grand Jury at the recent Spring Assizes for malicious injuries was £256 5s. I have seen a newspaper report of the conversation alluded to as having taken place between the Assize Judge (Mr. Justice Johnson) and the Grand Jury as to 10 alleged "malicious injuries," which the police declared were not "outrages" at all. The County Inspector states he is not aware of any disagreement existing between the Grand Jurors and the police as to what constitutes an "outrage;" the point in question being merely a misapprehension on the part of Colonel Carden in supposing that all the cases should appear in the one, the fact being that they appeared in different periods. Of the 16 cases in question, eight had appeared on the Outrage Returns for both the Spring and Summer Assizes of 1887; and of the eight others five appeared on the similar Return for the recent Spring Assizes. The remaining three did not appear in the Return, as they were not recorded as outrages. In these three cases the Grand Jury awarded no compensation. I apprehend the hon. and learned Member can obtain a detailed Return of all these cases from the lists laid before Presentment Sessions. Summarized, the cases are as follow:—One case of cock of hay and outhouse burned; six cases of cocks of hay burned; two cases of cow-houses and cattle burned; four cases of dwelling-houses burned; two cases of injury to animals; and one case of stack of barley burned. The County Inspector reports that since the passing of the recent Statute Boycotting and intimidation, have greatly decreased in the county; and the Irish Government can hardly undertake to interfere with the operation of a measure which has been so efficacious in restoring freedom of action by adopting the course suggested.

asked the Secretary of State for War, What number of British troops are now in Egypt; whether any troops, not British, receive British pay, or in any way are chargeable to this country; and, whether he can give an approximate estimate of the cost, inclusive of everything, of the British troops now in Egypt to this country?

(who replied) said: The British troops in Egypt on the 1st instant numbered 3,395 of all ranks. There are no troops there, who are not British, receiving pay from British Funds. The English officers lent to the Egyptian Army receive pay from. Egypt. The estimated gross charge for the British troops in Egypt is £267,409, of which the sum of £110,000 will be repaid by the Egyptian Government, to cover the extra charge involved by their serving in Egypt.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a Petition has been received from certain of the Egyptian exiles residing in Ceylon, praying that Her Majesty's Government will use its good offices with the Egyptian Government to induce it to allow those gentlemen to return to their native country; and, what action has been taken in the matter?

The Petition in question has been received, and has been, communicated to the Government of Egypt. No action has at present been taken in the matter; but it is not probable that the sentence passed will be remitted.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to a recent trial at the Hereford Assizes, in which Lord Chief Justice Coleridge stated that a farmer named George Walkins had been illegally fined £2 by the Abbeydore Magistrates, and that whoever had got the £2 and did not give it back very quickly would probably find himself in a scrape; and that it was subsequently admitted that the Excise had got this money; and, whether restitution has been ordered?

Yes, Sir; I have seen a newspaper account of this trial. The whole case has bean, I understand, referred for consideration to the Law Officers of the Crown, to whom any further Question on the subject should be addressed.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether, in view of the fact that the parcel postmen in towns are in some cases only paid 16s. per week; that this is insufficient to enable them to live and maintain their families decently; that they are not allowed, like the letter carriers, to receive Christmas boxes; that their wage was originally based upon the intention to employ Pensioners and Army Reserve men, who had other means of subsistence; and that only about 10 per cent of parcel postmen are either Pensioners or Army Reserve men, he can see his way to grant them what may be deemed a fair and adequate wage, based upon that which is paid to letter carriers?

There are comparatively very few towns in which unestablished postmen, giving their whole time to the Office when employed entirely on the delivery and collection of parcels, receive wages of not more than 16s. a-week. At the few towns where wages of only 16s. a-week are paid, such wages are not below the market value of labour in the district, and they are found sufficient to secure the services of suitable persons. The Department, although it has not prohibited postmen from receiving Christmas boxes from the public, does not by any means wish to encourage the extension of the system. The wages for persons employed on parcel work were not, as the hon. Member suggests, based upon the intention of employing Pensioners and Army Reserve men having other means of subsistence; though, as a matter of fact, in London, where there are about 400 men employed on parcel work, with fixed wages of 18s. a-week each, the proportion of Pensioners and Army Reserve men is as much as 25 per cent, four-fifths being Army Reserve men.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been called to the following Resolution, passed at a recent meeting of the Board of Guardians at Newport Pagnell:—

"That, having regard to the applications already made under the Allotments Act, 1887, and after duly considering the same, and finding there would be some difficulty and expense to the ratepayers in carrying out the Act in its entirety, the Rural Sanitary Authority do not in any case apply to the County Authority for compulsory powers under the Act;"

I understand that a resolution to the effect referred to was passed by a small majority at a recent meeting of the Board of Guardians of the Newport Pagnell Union. A copy of the Circular to which reference is made was sent to the Guardians of that Union. The Guardians are not, in my opinion, justified in passing a resolution that the Rural Sanitary Authority should not in any case apply to the County Authority for compulsory powers under the Act. The Sanitary Authority should clearly consider the circumstances of each particular case, and, according to those circumstances, arrive at their decision. I will inform the Sanitary Authority to this effect.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether John Duggan, unemployed labourer, of 13, Sardinia Place, Lincoln's Inn Fields, was, on the 1st of March, sentenced to, and underwent, five days' imprisonment on bread and water, with plank bed, for not sending his boy, aged nine, to St. Mary's School, and whether the reason stated by Duggan to the magistrate, Sir James Ingham, was correct—namely, that the child's absence was caused by the family being foodless, and the boy suffering from a bad ankle; and, whether he was at the time actually under treatment for the same at King's College Hospital (out patient. No. 2235)?

I have received a Report from the magistrate, from which it appears that this man had been four times summoned for neglecting to send his son to school regularly. He had been twice previously convicted. On the occasion in question, I am informed, the attendances of the child had been only 22 in 126. For two weeks during this period the boy was sick, having hurt his ankle. The magistrate took this fact into account; but convicted the man, on the ground that the boy had been persistently irregular before he was sick, and fined him 3s. and 2s. costs.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, What is the aggregate amount of Consols, Three Per Cent Reduced, and New Threes, held by the several Government Departments which may be converted by the Government under the proposed Government Bill; what is about the total number of separate holdings of private persons and Joint Stock Companies in such three Stocks; what is about the number of separate holdings of such Stocks of not exceeding £1,000; of not exceeding £2,000; of not exceeding£3,000; and, what is about the aggregate amount of such three classes of holdings?

The total amount of the three Stocks held by the Government Departments is £68,843,000; but I cannot say that it may all be converted by the Government, as in many cases the consent of other interested parties would be necessary to conversion. The Bank of England does not distinguish—and has no means of distinguishing—between holdings of individuals and of Joint Stock Banks, so I am unable to answer the hon. Baronet's second Question. With reference to his third Question, I am informed that, speaking very roughly, the number of holdings in these Stocks is, of £1,000 and under, 104,500; under £2,000, and over £1,000, 13,000; under £3,000, and over £2,000, 10,500—total, 128,000. The aggregate amount of such holdings is, roughly, £120,000,000, out of £558,000,000, the total amount of the three Stocks.

asked, whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would to-morrow give the House some idea of the quantities of each class of Stock held in Ireland; and whether, in view of the fact that one special class was more generally held in that country than others, it would not be unfairly dealt with?

said, he could not give the hon. and learned Member the information he wished for; as to the latter part of his Question, the application of principle was general.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the wife of Thomas Moroney, who has been imprisoned in Kilmainham Gaol since January, 1887, for contempt of Court, has been meanwhile evicted from their home by the Sheriff, acting under the escort of a force of police, and a Resident Magistrate; and, whether, considering the fact that Moroney has now been in prison more than 13 months, any communication will be made to the Bankruptcy Judge who committed him, or any other stops taken to promote the prisoner's release?

(who replied) said: I have already said, in reply to a similar Question, that the Executive Government have no power to interfere.

The right hon. and gallant Gentleman has not answered the second part of my Question. As I see the Chief Secretary in his place, may I ask him will he state whether he is prepared to make any communication to the Bankruptcy Court Judge on the subject of the release of Mr. Moroney?

We have no power, Sir, to interfere, as my right hon. and gallant Friend has stated.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether John Ryan, an evicted tenant farmer, was committed to Clonmel Gaol for contempt of Court on the 31st of March, 1886; and, whether, he was still in prison in May, 1887?

(who replied) said: John Ryan was not committed to Clonmel Gaol on the 31st of March, 1886, but on the 4th of June, 1886. He was discharged 12 months afterwards. Ryan was imprisoned not for the ordinary offence of taking re-possession of the evicted holding, but for disobeying an order of the Bankruptcy Court.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, If he will state what progress has been made with the works at Grey stones Harbour, County Wicklow; how much money has been expended on it up to the present time; what balance is avail-able to complete the work; and whether it is a fact that the place is rapidly filling up, owing to the want of a groin on the north side to stop the travel of the shingle?

I am informed that half of the work has been erected, and that the concrete blocks for the remainder have been made. The amount of contract, including the plant, has been £8,362, out of the total grant of £10,000 made by the Fishery Commissioners. I understand that there has been recently a considerable accumulation of sand and shingle. There has been a proposition to remedy this by the construction of a groin. But that was not recom- mended by the Fishery Commissioners. It will be a matter for consideration, however, when the authorized works are complete, and if there are funds available. In the meanwhile, the movements of the shingle are being carefully watched and recorded.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is proposed to remove the Platters Rock in Holyhead Harbour; if so, what is the estimated cost, and how is it to be met?

(who replied) said: In answering this Question, I may as well answer Question 35 also. I am informed that the cost of removing the Platters Rock in Holyhead Harbour is estimated at £250,000. The Board of Trade are not now prepared to recommend such an expenditure.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been drawn to a sentence at Mumford Potty Sessions, passed on Susan Macrow Cock, a girl aged 12 years, of 10 days' imprisonment in Norwich Gaol, and five years imprisonment in a reformatory, for stealing a piece of meat value 10d.; whether this was a first offence; and, whether, under the circumstances, he can advise any mitigation of the sentence?

I have obtained a Report from the magistrates on this case. The facts are as stated. It was a first offence; but the girl was watched and detected in consequence of meat having being missed on previous occasions when she had visited the shop. I think it is a proper case for a reformatory, as the home influences on this girl were not good; and I am not prepared at present to advise any remission of the sentence.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, If he will inform the House whether the freedom of trade hitherto enjoyed at Gibraltar is about to be interfered with; and, if so, what arcs the restrictions intended to be imposed?

In answer to the hon. Member, I have to state that Her Majesty's Government have no intention of interfering with the freedom of legitimate trade in Gibraltar.

asked, whether the apprehensions that existed on this question were altogether without foundation?

repeated that legitimate business would not be interfered with.

Will the hon. Gentleman define what he means by legitimate trade?

The hon. Member is as well able as I am to define legitimate trade. I will only say that smuggling is not legitimate trade.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether the Government are aware that a Dutch bid has been made, equal in value to over £40 per £10 share, for the control of the Delagoa Bay Railway, and that nothing but immediate action can save the railway, and with it the key to British trade and commerce in the Transvaal and East Central Africa, from falling into the power of a foreign country?

(who replied) said: Her Majesty's Government are not aware of any offer for the purchase of the Delagoa Bay Railway, or of any of the shares in that undertaking; and as to the question of Her Majesty's Government concerning themselves in it, I must refer the hon. Member to my statement on the 5th of March, that it has not been entertained by Her Majesty's Government, because the railway in question does not tra- verse, and is not intended to enter, British territory.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true (as stated in The Star newspaper of the 10th of March) that on the 2nd of March, at Dingle, in County Kerry, a newsvendor, named Patrick Ferriter, was sentenced, to three months' hard labour for selling a copy of United Ireland to a policeman named Reddy; whether in order to obtain the paper, the policeman falsely represented his name to be Tynan, and described himself as a Wexford tailor out of work; whether the sale of the paper took place in November, 1887; and, whether the policeman has been promoted or censured?

(who replied) said: Sir, Patrick Ferriter was sentenced at Dingle on the 2nd of March to three months' imprisonment for selling United Ireland, containing reports of suppressed branches of the National League. The constable denies that he gave the name of Tynan, but he did represent himself as a tailor. The sale did take place in November last, and the prosecution was instituted soon after; but the case had to be adjourned from time to time. The policeman has not been promoted or censured.

I wish to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, whether the adjournments from November to the trial were not on every occasion at the instance of the Crown; and, whether at the trial Mr. Ferriter applied for a further adjournment, as his solicitor was engaged at the Assizes at Tralee, and was refused?

I cannot reply to the first part of the Question of the hon. and learned Gentleman in the affirmative, because twice Ferriter was unable to appear at the Sessions in consequence of undergoing imprisonment for committing assaults on the police. I cannot say, at the present moment, what wore the reasons for the other adjournments; but if the hon. and learned Gentleman will put a Question on the Paper I will answer it.

But the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has given his answer on the report in a paper, and cannot he say whether or not this was in the paper?

I did not give my answer from the report in the paper. I have stated that on two occasions Ferriter was in prison.

Well, I will put the Question down.

This man had three months for soiling United Ireland. Would it not have been equally an offence if he had refused to sell it, as in the recent case of refusing to sell turf?

I think that is a matter of opinion. It is hardly a matter for a Question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, How many out-door officers of Customs who had completed the prescribed three years' service, and whose conduct and abilities had never been questioned, wore debarred from the examination held in 1886 for out-port clerkships; and also from the examination held in January, 1888, for Examining Officers of Customs; and, whether the officers in each of the cases referred to wore debarred solely in consequence of private Reports made by the collectors, and of which the officers had no intimation whatever; and, if so, will the Board of Customs inform the officers of the nature of the charges made against them, and afford them an opportunity of replying thereto?

I am informed that no single officer was refused permission to compete at either of the examinations mentioned under the circumstances stated in the Question. This being so, it is unnecessary for me to answer the second paragraph of the Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to the Resolutions of the Toome meeting of the 10th ultimo, as to the Bann drainage; and, if he can state when, and how, the Government propose to legislate on the subject?

(who replied) said: The attention of the Government has been called to the Resolutions alluded to. They hope to introduce legislation on the subject at the earliest practicable date.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether the proposed legislation will be introduced before Easter?

said, one Bill in connection with the subject would be laid before the House before Easter. He could not say whether or not it would be the Bill relating to the Bann.

asked the Lord Advocate, If he can now state when the Universities (Scotland) Bill is likely to be introduced?

Yes, Sir; this Bill will be introduced in "another place" to-morrow, or on Monday.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to a "Grand bazaar and drawing of prizes" to be held at Swords, County Dublin, on Sunday, the 18th of March, for which lottery tickets have been issued; whether the prizes are—

"A £20 note, the gift of Sir Thomas II. Grattan Esmonde, M.P.; a fat pig; portraits of the Most Rev. Dr. Walsh and Most Rev. Dr. Croke; a fat sheep; portraits of C. S. Parnell and W. E. Gladstone; a box of foreign cigars; portraits of Cardinal Manning and Cardinal Newman; a beautiful meerschaum pipe;"

(who replied) said: I beg to state that the attention of the Government has been called to the matter referred to in the Question of the hon. Gentleman. The law in Ireland is the same as that in England in reference to such lotteries; and the Irish Government will consult their Law Officers as to the steps that should be taken with regard to bazaars such as that referred to.

asked the Secretary of State to the Homo Department, whether, in consequence of the answers given to Questions on both sides of the House with regard to lotteries in England, steps had been taken with regard to them; and, whether the reference to the Public Prosecutor really meant anything?

said, the reference to the Public Prosecutor meant that the cases would be dealt with as the law directed. He presumed that the Public Prosecutor would exorcise his judgment as to the expediency of proceeding or not in particular cases. He believed the rule was that when the Public Prosecutor drew attention to the fact of such lotteries being held, the promoters revoked the drawing, and it proceeded no further.

inquired, whether he was to understand that such lotteries had been stopped, in consequence of the action of the Public Prosecutor?

Oh, frequently, Sir. Sometimes the originator of the lottery was unable to return all the subscriptions, because he did not know where to address the subscribers.

asked the Postmaster General, Upon what principle letters coming from any foreign country within the Postal Union can be re-directed to any place within the United Kingdom, or to another country within the Union, without any additional charge for postage or registration, whilst every letter, post-card, or postal packet, posted within the United Kingdom, is liable to additional charge for ouch re direction—

"Unless the original and second address be within the delivery of the same post-office, sub-office, or rural walk; and even in that case they are not exempt from a second postage unless the re-direction be made by an officer of the Post Office."

As regards the first of the hon. Member's Questions, I should explain that the exemption from charge on letters between countries of the Postal Union was assented to by this country, not willingly, but entirely in deference to the wishes of the majority of the representatives of the countries belonging to the Union. In reply to the second Question, I should state that the London District has, from the first, been looked upon, for purposes of re-direction, as forming one free delivery; but the question of a charge, even in London, has more than once been considered, with the view of doing away with the exceptional arrangement; and, although there is no present intention of making such a change, the point must be considered as reserved only.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What is the amount of the Reproductive Loan Fund to the credit of the County of Leitrim; how many loans have been granted within the last two y ears; what is their amount; and, what rate of interest is allowed on the portion of the Fund which has not been borrowed?

(who replied) said: The balance of cash and stock of this Fund lying to the credit of the County Leitrim at the present date is £1,957. No loans have been granted within the last two years, nor were any recommended during that period. The Fund is invested in Three per Cent. Consols.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, When advances will be made to the Rev. "F. Donohue, P.P., the manager of Mohill Schools, on account of the money expended by him on the faith of grants which the Education Board has boon in the habit of making for school buildings, but which the Board has not been yet able to make, owing to the funds placed at their disposal last year for these purposes having become exhausted?

(who replied) said: The Commissioners of National Education inform me they are unable at present to state when they will be in a position to deal with the application, put forward for the first time on the 5th of this month by the Rev. F. Donohue, for a grant to build a vested school-house to replace the non-vested school-house in which the Mohill Convent National School is conducted, and that they have already communicated with the rev. gentleman to that effect.

Is it probable the amount will be granted this year?

said, it was impossible for them to say when it would be granted?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, in all his dealings with the case of the Civil Service writers, he has ever afforded them an opportunity of being personally heard through their representatives; and, if not, whether, having regard to the constant opportunities enjoyed by Heads of Departments and Treasury Officials of expressing their opinions, he would now consent to receive a representative of the writers?

The case of the copyists has been dealt with by a Committee of Heads of Departments, and upon their Report a considerable improvement has been effected in the conditions of copyist service. The whole matter will now be laid before the Royal Commission on Civil Establishments. In this state of affairs it does not seem desirable that I should receive a representative of the copyists.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, in November last, Messrs. Burn and Berridge, solicitors, of Pancras Lane, City, applied to Sir Charles Warren for information which would assist in the identification of certain policemen who, as they allege, had assaulted their clients; and, whether the information asked for was not given, and a letter was written on behalf of the Chief Commissioner, declining to render any assistance; and, if so, what action he proposes to take in the matter?

Messrs. Burn and Berridge did not apply for the identification of any specified policeman, nor did they name any person as having been assaulted. They made a general application to be furnished with a list of the names and numbers of bodies of police who were on duty at certain points on the 13th of November. Under those circumstances, the Chief Commissioner, acting on the opinion of his legal adviser, did not consider it to be a part of his duty to give the information asked for. I see no reason to take further action in the matter.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is true that the Government of Egypt is endeavouring to raise a new loan of £2,000,000; and, if so, for what purpose is this money required?

Her Majesty's Government are informed that the Egyptian Government are desirous of raising a new loan; but the exact amount is still uncertain. The transaction will be economical and prudent. A large portion of the loan is required for the arrangement recently made with the ex-Khedive and his family, and also with other pensioners; as the lands to be ceded in commutation of their yearly allowances are pledged to the Domains Loan, and must be redeemed. The result, however, of this transfer will be a reduced charge on Egyptian Revenues.

asked, whether this proposed loan would rate among the Egyptian loans?

I must ask the right hon. Gentleman to give Notice of the Question.

Would the right hon. Gentleman give the House some assurance that this loan will not be finally contracted before the House has had an opportunity of expressing its opinion upon it?

No, Sir; I cannot give such an undertaking; it is not to be issued upon the security of Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he will investigate the charges of stone throwing and window breaking made against Head Constable Stephenson and other policemen, and sworn to by several independent and unimpeached witnesses at a special meeting of the Limerick Town Council, held on the 9th of February, to consider applications for £4 and £10 compensation for windows broken on the 27th November, on the occasion of the suppressed "Manchester Martyrs" Meeting; and, whether his attention has been called to the following question put to Mr. Brady by Mr. Justice Holmes when the case came before him at the Limerick Assizea—

"Did they (the police) throw the stones deliberately at the hotel windows?"

"They did, my Lord, and at our windows;"

"They had got the evidence of the ladies that the police threw the stones, for what reason it was difficult to understand, but he should take the ladies' statement for it; that was in other words, that men, not ' rioters,' not engaged in a ' tumultuous assembly,' but brought there by their officers, took it into their heads to throw stones and break the windows. The application did not come within the meaning of the Act; the police were not engaged in ' unlawful and riotous ' assembly; and for the same reason as in the former cases he should make a like rule and refuse the application."

(who replied) said, it appeared that a serious riot occurred in Limerick on the occasion referred to in the Question. The police were attacked, and stones, bricks, and hammers thrown at them from housetops and windows. On the 9th of February the Town Council met to consider claims for malicious injury arising out of the riot. The Town Council rejected all the claims except two for windows alleged to have been broken by the police. Only two witnesses swore that they saw Head Constable Stephenson break the windows. The two cases were adjourned before the Judge of Assize. Several witnesses swore that they saw the police break the windows; but the two who had sworn they saw Head Constable Stephenson do it were not produced. The District Inspector reported that the report of the Judge's words set forth in the Question were fairly correct. It was quite possible the District Inspector also reported that stones might have been thrown by the police, as stones were thrown at them from the housetops.

asked the hon. Member for Penrith, as a Charity Commissioner, Whether the Charity Commissioners have made a scheme by which the yearly sum of £700 and accumulations amounting to £8,000 belonging to "Attwell's Charity" are to be applied by the Skinners' Company for a Middle School for Girls; whether the will of Laurence Attwell provided that the rents and profits should, from time to time, be employed in some good sort whereby poor people, and especially such as are free of the Company, may be set on work, and yet the stocks kept and remain whole, and increase yearly into the revenues of the said kinds; whether he can state what is now the income and what is the amount of the accumulations belonging to "Attwell's Charity;" and, whether the Charity Commissioners will provide for the application of a reasonable part of the Trust income to giving employment to the poor?

The first two paragraphs of the hon. Member's Question are correct so far as they go. The original Trusts of the will of Laurence Attwell, however, were displaced in 1828 by a decree of the Court of Chancery, which directed that the income of the Endowment should be applied in loans to young men of good character, beginners in some trade or business, with a preference to members of the Skinners' Company. Since the date of the scheme of the Court of Chancery no part of the Endowment has been applicable in the manner desired by the hon. Member; and the Commissioners have no power by statute, or otherwise, to appropriate loan funds in such manner. From the last accounts furnished to the Commissioners it appears that the property of the Charity consists of real estate, yielding a gross income of £ 1,083 17s. 6d., and of an accumulated sum of £5,745 13s. 5d. New Three per Cent. Annuities.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Out of what Fund the bonus of 5s. per cent payable under the National Debt (Conversion) Bill to parties assenting to the conversion thereunder of Consols or Reduced Stocks will be paid; and, will it be a charge against Revenue for the forthcoming financial year?

No, Sir; the bonus will not be a charge against Revenue in the ensuing financial year, as the hon. Baronet will see on referring to Clause 13 of the Bill, which deals with the provision of money to meet this and other expenses incidental to conversion.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he will state, with regard to his scheme for the conversion of the National Debt, whether commission will be paid on ordinary accounts, or only on Trust accounts; and, whether all joint accounts will be assumed to be Trusts, or will a declaration be required to enable an agent to get the commission?

The hon. Member will find that the Bill authorizes the payment of this commission to all recognized agents through whoso instrumentality the conversion of Consols or Reduced Threes takes place, and does not limit it to Trust accounts. There will, therefore, be no question of a declaration of a Trust in this connection.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, under the Bill for the conversion of the National Debt, provision will be made to protect Trustees who have invested moneys in Consols to cover annuities under wills, or similarly to provide for ground-rents or rent-charges under wills where a distribution of the rest of the property has been legally made?

the hon. Gentleman will, I think, find that Clause 19 of the Bill gives sufficient protection to Trustees in such cases. Every care is being taken to render the position of Trustees secure in the matter.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that Charles Hayward, of Ashford, Kent, is now being prosecuted for the 60th time since May, 1885, for breach of the Vaccination Laws?

I am informed by the Guardians of the East Ashford Union that with respect to one of his children Charles Hayward has on 18 occasions had orders made on him by Justices requiring him to cause the child to be vaccinated, and that he has been as many times convicted for not complying with the orders. In respect of another child he has been convicted once for not having it vaccinated within three months of birth; on eight occasions orders of Justices have been made on him for the vaccination of the child, and he has been convicted the same number of times for disobedience. He has thus been convicted in all 27 times.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether it is the intention of the Board to levy fines upon the owners of steam launches, tugs, & c, who take friends on board (in excess of 12) without payment, or whether the intentions of the Board, in regard to this matter are the same as were stated in reply to a Question put to the Parliamentary Secretary of the Board last Session?

The position of the matter is the same now as it was on the occasion to which the hon. Member refers.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether, before any action is taken with regard to the Report of the Indian Public Service Commission, a Parliamentary inquiry will be instituted; and, whether alterations of the extensive character proposed by the Commission will be submitted to Parliament in the form of a Bill?

It is impossible for the Secretary of State to say what stops will be taken with reference to the Report of the Indian Public Service Commission until he has received the views of the Government of India, by whom the Report is now being considered.

said, the Report had been laid on the Table of the House, and the question of when it would be printed and circulated lay with the House.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a full abstract of the Report appeared in The Times a few weeks ago?

asked the Postmaster General, Whether complaints have reached him that, in the postal districts of Newtownhamilton, Camlough, and Beleek, County Armagh, the English Mails are delivered three hours later than if they were despatched by car from Newry Post Office, and if the Postal Authorities will remedy the matter?

No, Sir. No such complaints as the hon. Member refers to appear to have been received; but if he will be good enough to put the complaints he has received in writing, I will have inquiries made into the matter.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether complaints have reached him that marriages in Roman Catholic churches in the neighbourhood of Victoria Docks have frequently had to be postponed, owing to the non-arrival of the Registrar, Mr. Frederick Mulley, Leytonstone Union, Stratford, E?

I have not received any complaints in the matter referred to in the Question, and the Registrar General informs me that no such complaints have reached him. Leytonstone is in the West Ham Union and Registration District. There is no registration officer in that district named Frederick Mulley. Mr. John Mulley is the Deputy Superintendent Registrar; but the Registrar General states that he is never required to be present officially at marriages in Roman Catholic churches.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he is aware that the West Surrey Waterworks Company are asking for power to acquire several acres of land on the Thames at Halliford, for the pur- pose of constructing buildings and filter beds, for which they are unfitted, in consequence of such land being frequently flooded; whether part of such works include a wharf or landing stage extending six feet into the channel of the River at its narrowest part, which will materially interfere with the flow of the River; and, whether he will take any steps to oblige the Conservators of the Thames to do their duty and oppose such Bill in Committee, as the riparian owners, who will be injured, have no locus standi to do so, and as the Conservators are, from their Parliamentary powers, the guardians of the stream?

The West Surrey Waterworks Company are promoting a Bill in Parliament, under which it is proposed to acquire several acres of land adjoining the Thames in the parish of Walton, for the purpose of constructing buildings and reservoirs. The Conservators, however, inform me that it does not appear, cither from the Bill or the deposited plans, that the Company propose to erect a wharf or landing-stage extending six feet into the channel of the River at its narrowest part. The Conservators, I am informed, have taken all necessary steps by petitioning Parliament against the Bill; and on Tuesday last, when a Committee of this House had the Bill under consideration, the Conservators appeared by counsel, and on the representations made by them the Committee inserted clauses in the Bill to protect the public interests. Among those provisions is one that no works affecting the Thames shall be constructed until the plans, & c, of such works have been approved by the Conservators.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, If he will lay upon the Table of the House, a Copy of any Regulations and Orders in Council affecting the pensions granted to the widows of retired navigating officers on the Superannuated List from 1861 till 1886; whether any diminution was made in the amount of these pensions; and, by whose authority or recommendation was it made; and for what reason?

There have been no Regulations in regard to pensions of widows of navigating officers beyond those contained in the Orders in Council dated 28th February, 1855, 22nd February, 1860, 26th June, 1867, and 22nd February, 1870. No diminution has been made in the pensions sanctioned by these Orders in Council to widows of retired navigating officers, though it is the case that previous to 1880 an erroneous calculation of the time of certain officers, and which it proved could not be borne out by the terms of the Orders in Council, led to their widows being awarded a higher scale of pension than they were legally entitled to, and for the payment and legislation of which a special Order in Council had to be obtained. This Order in Council only governed past cases, and did not establish a prospective claim.

asked the hon. Member for Penrith, as a Charity Commissioner, If the Commissioners will be good enough to cause a skeleton map of England and Wales to be prepared, showing the position of the various Endowed Schools and their respective grades; and, in presenting it to the House, if he will furnish at the same time a Return, arranged by Counties, showing the accommodation for and present numbers of Boarders and Day Boys or Girls at each School, and the total charge for Boarders and Day Pupils at each School; if he will add to the Return the present estimated Population of each County; and, if he will supplement the above, so far as he is able, by a similar Return, by Counties, showing the provision which has been made by private adventure for Intermediate or Middle Class Schools?

The Charity Commissioners fully recognize that a map showing the position of the various Endowed Schools would be of considerable advantage to the public, as it would show the present state and further requirements of secondary education in England and Wales so far as endowments are con- cerned; but they are quite unable, with their present staff and resources, to undertake such a work without stopping the current work of the Endowed Schools Department of the Office; and, for the same reason, they are unable to furnish a Return in the form desired by the hon. Baronet. The Charity Commissioners have no general knowledge of, and no means of obtaining, any accurate information about the provisions made by private adventure for Intermediate or Middle Class Schools. We can, however, give the hon. Baronet a Return, by Counties, of the Endowments hitherto ascertained to be subject to the Endowed Schools Acts, showing whether those Endowments are or are not regulated by schemes established under those Acts, and, if so regulated, whether they are for boys or for girls, and the grades of the schools so established. Perhaps the hon. Baronet will move for the Return in continuation of Endowed Schools Acts Return No. 29, House of Lords, 1888, and there will be no objection to granting it, so far as the Charity Commission is concerned.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, When the Government propose to introduce the Bill for remedying abuses in the formation of Companies under Limited Liability, referred to in the Queen's Speech?

, in reply, said, it was proposed that the Bill should be introduced in the House of Lords by the Lord Chancellor; but the date must depend on the progress of other Business.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether it is the intention of the Government, this Session, to bring in a Bill to amend the Jaw relating to Weights and Measures, as recommended by the Standard Department of the Board of Trade, which was promised by the Government last year?

The ques- tion of further legislation in connection with the Weights and Measures Act is receiving the careful attention of the Board of Trade; and if the state of Public Business will admit, I hope to introduce, this Session, an amending Bill.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, If he can explain why, in the Estimates for the Irish Land Commission for the period from the 1st of April to the 22nd of August, 1888, a reduction of three legal Sub-Commissioners and 12 non-legal Sub-Commissioners is shown under the number for last year, whereas the land cases to be heard have increased by 50,000; and, was this reduction made on the recommendation of the Land Commission; and, if not, who is responsible for it?

As a matter of fact, the numbers of Sub-Commissioners actually appointed during the present financial year have never reached the figure contemplated in the Supplementary Estimates of last summer, which were necessarily more or less conjectural. The greatest number of Sub-Commissioners in existence this year is 50, which is the present number. Provision has boon made for 65 Sub-Commissioners next year, being an increase of 15 over the numbers now engaged. This provision was personally settled between the Land Commissioners and myself in December last, to cover the number which at that time it was hoped would be sufficient, but on the distinct understanding that if the requirements of the service should prove to be larger the necessary sanction would be given; and, as a fact, this has been done, the sanctioned numbers being now raised to 80.

There were 80 in the Estimates last year; and my point is, how is it this year there is an estimated number of only 65, and how are you going to provide the salary of 80 when you estimate for only 65?

As I have already explained, the Supplementary Estimates of last summer were necessarily very conjectural as to the number of Sub-Commissioners required, and provision was made for a larger number; but, as a matter of fact, the number was not appointed, and the number in existence is 50. That number was increased, after the consultation I had with the Land Commissioners, to 65, as the number, it was thought, which would prove to be sufficient for the work next year; but, as I have said, on the distinct understanding if it proved insufficient the number would be increased to meet the necessary work, and that number was subsequently increased, because two months after it was found the work had increased, and application was made by the Commissioners and sanction given, the sanctioned number of Sub-Commissioners now being 80.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he can state when the Employers' Liability Bill will be in the hands of Members?

I cannot state the time exactly; but it will be in the hands of Members very shortly.

Will it be before Easter?

Certainly.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he is prepared to recommend the extension of the railway from Nannoya to Haputale, in the Island of Ceylon; whether he is aware that in answer to a Question on this subject, put to his Predecessor in Office on the 12th of May, 1887, he replied, that—

"The extension could not be undertaken by Government in the present financial condition of the Colony, but that a Private Company would be at liberty to take it up;"

The Governor of the Colony has recently been informed that the Secretary of State is now satisfied that the proposed extension may be undertaken by the Colonial Government. Consequently no question arises as to the formation of a Private Company.

(for Mr. MURPHY, Dublin, St. Patrick's) asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What were the names of the two persons whose fines of £10 each for offences against the Margarine Act were reduced to £2 each by the Lord Lieutenant on Memorial; what was the date on which the original fines were imposed by the police magistrate; and, if any other Memorials have been received by the Lord Lieutenant, praying to reduce fines under the same Act?

(who replied) said, the names of the two persons referred to were Bartholomew Magee and Bridget O'Gorman. They were convicted on February 15. Three other Memorials had since been received by the Lord Lieutenant, praying that the fines which had been imposed upon them under the same Act might also be reduced, and those Memorials were now under consideration.

Would the right hon. and gallant Gentleman have any objection to inform the Lord Lieutenant that all these parties have the right of appeal to the Recorder of Dublin?

In all probability the Lord Lieutenant is perfectly aware of that.

I also wished to ask, as the only remaining industry in the three Southern Provinces of Ireland is the making of butter, why the Lord Lieutenant has reduced the fines so justly imposed by the magistrates from £10 to £2 without oven giving them the opportunity of appealing?

When did the three other convictions occur, and who were the magistrates?

In the first two cases, as I explained a few days ago, the Lord Lieutenant took into consideration the fact that they were the first cases which had occurred under the Act. They occurred almost immediately after the Act came into operation, and the Lord Lieutenant considered that some clemency might be exercised with regard to them. The three later cases to which I have referred were dealt with by the magistrates on March 2, and of course those offenders had more time to know what they were about and had also time to hear of the previous convictions. I cannot possibly say what effect their appeal to the Lord Lieutenant will have, but I should say that probably that circumstance would be taken into consideration. Mr. Woodlock was the presiding magistrate in each case.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentlemen aware that on the day after the proclamation of the County Clare, my hon. Friend the Member for the Eastern Division of County Clare (Mr. Cox) was for a speech then delivered subsequently arrested and sentenced to four months' imprisonment; and may I ask if the Lord Lieutenant's attention was directed to that case under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act; and if the Lord Lieutenant will inquire into that case and consider whether it is not a fit one to show his clemency, as the alleged offence was committed immediately after?

Order, order!

As the alleged offence was committed after—

Order, order! Mr. Pickersgill.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether it is intended that the proceedings of the Committee of the House of Lords, to inquire into the "Sweating System," shall be open to the public.

I understand that the Committee have decided to admit the public to hear the evidence taken before them.

asked the Lord Advocate, Whether his attention has been called to a report in The Highland News of 3rd instant of an indignation meeting of the inhabitants of Rogart, Sutherlandshire, held in the Free Church there to protest against the action of the Police Commissioners in stationing a police constable in the district; whether it is the fact, as stated at the meeting, that there has been no police constable resident in the district for the last 70 years; whether he can state what are the circumstances in Rogart calling for this action of the authorities at the present time, who is intended to be benefited thereby, and who is to bear the additional expense?

I was not aware of the facts stated in the Question, but assume them to be correct. I must decline to answer Questions such as those contained in the last paragraph, which relates entirely to local matters of detail.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he adheres to his statement that the three copyists whose promotion to the Lower Division has been suspended—namely, Messrs. W. H. Brattle, R. F. Franklin, and T. Knighton—misstated their ages; and, if so, whether he is aware that the gentlemen in question state that they have never made any such mis-statement; and, whether, therefore, as the matter affects their honour and integrity, he will give them an opportunity to prove their assertion?

I am much obliged to the hon. Member for putting this Question, because I have referred to my answer to the hon. Member's former Question, and I think it is open to misconstruction. I never intended to say that the copyists in question had mis-stated their age, nor did I say so. A Rule was laid down for the Sub-Committee, which dealt with the individual cases of copyists recommended for promotion, that those who were within the age for competition for the Lower Division in the ordinary way were not eligible for special promotion; and in recommending these men it must be obvious that there was mis-statement or mistake as to their age and eligibility; but I am far from imputing intentional mis-statement to anyone.

asked, whether the hon. Gentleman had made himself acquainted with the nature of the work which Brattle had for eight years been engaged in?

I think the hon. Gentleman will see that it would not be possible—and that, if possible, it would be very unwise—for the Secretary to the Treasury to examine personally the work of individuals in the Departments. That matter has been referred to a Committee of the Department to deal with. Although I am most anxious to answer any Question upon any subject relating to my Department, I feel that these continued Questions with reference to individuals and their work is creating very great difficulty in the Civil Service. I hope that I shall not be understood in any way to shrink from giving the fullest and most complete information; but hon. Members must see how difficult it is for the Heads of Departments to carry on their respective Departments if individual grievances are to be made the subject of Questions in the House.

Will the Secretary to the Treasury take steps to ascertain from the Heads of the Department if a certain man, who was employed at 10d. an hour, has for the last eight years been engaged on confidential work, relating to the advance of the Russians in Central Asia, and to important State secrets, which the Press, if they had been able to bribe him, would have been glad to get hold of?

I think, after what I have said, I must adhere to the position I have taken up, that it would be exceedingly improper, if not impossible, to examine into individual cases.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether in the paragraph in the Memorandum accompanying the Report of the Committee on the Hall Marking of Foreign Watch Cases, to the effect that while in the assay offices—

"In London, Birmingham, and Sheffield, accurate balances and modern appliances have been adopted, in other offices less accurate and even primitive methods of treatment have been retained,"

The paragraph refers to all the offices, including Chester, and the Committee, when at Chester, expressed no such opinion as the hon. Member refers to. Had they done so, it would have been beyond the scope of the inquiry.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether George Walpole Leake, Police Magistrate in Perth, Western Australia, who has been lately appointed Acting Justice by Governor Broom during the suspension of Chief Justice Onslow, was convicted in Perth and fined £10 for having used a defaced postage stamp; whether he was committed for contempt of Court in the same town; whether he is the same George Walpole Leake who, while acting as Attorney General, assaulted an attorney named Burt by hurling at him a large pewter ink bottle during a trial in the Supreme Court; and, whether the Colonial Office Regulation, No. 75, has been departed from in appointing him?

I have made inquiry, and find that there is no record in the Colonial Office of the circumstances referred to. The hon. Member does not state whether the transactions which he alleges to have occurred were of distant or recent date; but whatever foundation there may be for the statements which have reached him, it is clear that successive Governors have held a high opinion of Mr. Leake's character and ability, as he has since 1857 been on many occasions appointed to act as Crown Solicitor, Police Magistrate, Attorney General, and Public Prosecutor; and he now holds the responsible post of Police Magistrate of Perth, the capital of the Colony. His appointment to act temporarily as Chief Justice has involved no departure from the 75th Colonial Regulation, which relates to permanent appointment.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether, having regard to the Report of the Secretary to the Boundaries Commission, dated 2nd January, 1888, which states that at that date only one-fourth of the work had been done, and that the work of the Commission would probably not be completed till "about the end of July," he will take steps to obtain from the Commission a Preliminary Report, stating definitely the principles on which the Commission have decided to adjust overlapping boundaries of unions; and, whether he will arrange that such Preliminary Report shall be in the hands of Members of this House before the Easter Recess?

asked, Whether the statement, on page 517 of the Civil Service Estimates, that the work of the Local Government Boundary Commission will be completed about the end of July, is to be taken to indicate that the Report will be issued at that time; and, whether it will be possible to afford to Members an earlier opportunity of becoming acquainted with the general results of the inquiry?

It does not devolve on the Commissioners to adjust the boundaries; but to make such recommendations as they deem desirable with regard to such adjustment. As regards the Question as to the principles on which the Commissioners will act, I should presume that in each case when the facts have been ascertained the decision of the Boundary Commissioners would be according to the circumstances of the particular case. I will communicate with the Commissioners as to whether it is their intention to submit any Preliminary Report.

said, I hope on Monday next to be able to explain to the House the principles on which the boundaries will be drawn. The House may be satisfied that no re-adjustment of boundaries will be determined upon without the House having full opportunity of considering each case.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he can now state the decision at which he has arrived in regard to the case of Henry Hart, sentenced at the Devon Quarter Sessions held in February, to two months' imprisonment, with hard labour, for stealing coal, the property of his employer, with respect to which sentence a largely signed Petition has been forwarded to the Home Office by residents in the locality, asking on various grounds for a remission of a portion of the sentence?

I have carefully considered the case of Hart, sentenced at Devon Sessions, and I regret that I am unable to advise any interference with the sentence, which appears to have been most carefully considered by the magistrates in consultation upon all the circumstances of the case.

asked Mr. Attorney General, Whether he has observed that The Blackburn Evening Express (Primrose edition) offers to give away £10 in prizes each week to those who during the week have become possessors of the seven copies of that journal, and will send to its office the coupon printed in each copy; and, whether this is an infringement of the law against lotteries?

I have considered the advertisement in the paper which the hon. Member has been good enough to send me; and, in my opinion, the scheme therein proposed does infringe the law against lotteries.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman take action in the matter?

It is not for me to take action; but I will take care that the attention of the proper authorities is called to the matter.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Government will lay upon the Table a Return giving the dates on which the Lord Lieutenant was absent from, and on which the Chief Secretary was present in, Ireland during the year 1887?

No, Sir.

had the following Question on the Paper: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, If the "Geoffrey Browning," who signed the address to the right hon. Members for St. George's, Hanover Square, and Rossendale for the recent Unionist demonstration in Dublin is the gentleman who receives £1,000 as Solicitor to the Irish Land Commission; and, if Mr. B. Leech, author of a pamphlet against Home Rule, price 3d., is paid a similar salary as Examiner on Title to the Irish Land Purchase Commission? The hon. and learned Gentleman said, that before he asked the Question which stood in his name, he wished to state that as he wrote the Question it would read—"To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, If the Geoffrey Browning, who signed the address to Lord Hartington and Mr. Goschen for the recent Tory demonstration in Dublin, etc." For the word "Tory" the word "Unionist" had been substituted. He wished to know whether the word Tory was an un-Parliamentary word?

then asked the Question.

I will endeavour to answer the hon. and learned Gentleman without referring to the word "Tory." Mr. Geoffrey Browning, who signed the address to the Marquess of Hartington and Mr. Goschen, is the Solicitor to the Irish Land Commission, and receives £1,000 a-year. Mr. Leech also receives the same salary as Examiner on Title to the Irish Land Purchase Commission, and is the author of a pamphlet entitled The Continuity of the Irish Revolutionary Movement. Questions somewhat similar to these have several times been put to me relative to other members of the Civil Service; and it may be as well that I should state the position of the Treasury in regard to the general question as to how far permanent Civil servants are at liberty to take part in politics. There is, I am informed, no written Rule extending to the whole Service on the subject; but the existence of an unwritten but operative law is proved by the rarity of the charges of partizanship brought against Civil servants. Speaking generally, the Rule is as I have before stated—namely, that permanent members of the Civil Service of all grades are to avoid taking any public or prominent part in politics; as it is only under these conditions that satisfactory relations between Ministers and Civil Service Departments, and with the public at large, are possible. Her Majesty's Government—and, I think, all previous Governments—have desired to give to Civil servants, within the bounds I have indicated, the fullest possible freedom as to the exercise of their political opinions; but if complaints that such freedom had been abused became frequent, it would be the duty of the Government to consider what Regulations were necessary for the protection of the interests of the general body of the Civil Service. In certain Departments the Heads have already laid down Rules on the subject; but these Rules are not general to the Service, and Her Majesty's Government rely on the good sense of the permanent Civil Service to make the issue of Regulations unnecessary. I am informed by the Irish Land Commissioners that they have always disapproved of any of their officials taking part in any political manifestation, In the above cases, and also in that of another gentleman, and who subscribed to the fund for Mr. Wilfrid Blunt's defence, the Commissioners conveyed their disapproval to those gentlemen when the matter was first brought under their notice some two months ago. I may add that, having had very considerable experience of the Civil Service, and having had as my Private Secretary, in my first Office of Secretary to the Treasury, a gentleman of opposite politics to my own, and who served me most loyally and faithfully, but who subsequently became Private Secretary to the Prime Minister, and who now holds a high, office in the Civil Service, I wish to bear my testimony generally to the great discretion exercised by those gentlemen in the discharge of their duty both as Civil servants and citizens. I should deeply regret if it were necessary to impose any restriction upon them, because I think, generally speaking, it is not necessary or deserved. I trust, therefore, that the assurance of the Government that Civil servants will be discouraged from taking any active part, by way of public speaking, in politics will be sufficient to prevent the issue of any Regulation upon the subject.

Will the prohibition extend to the Inspector of Irish Fisheries, who made a speech in the General Synod of the Church of Ireland?

As to the statement with reference to the Examiner on Title to the Irish Land Purchase Commissioner, Mr. Brougham Leech, who wrote a pamphlet on the continuity of the Irish Hottentot movement, or whatever it was, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to say whether that pamphlet will, after the remark he has made, be withdrawn from circulation?

No, Sir. I am not prepared to add anything to what I have already stated. The hon. and learned Gentleman is aware that in times past many eminent members of the Civil Service have used their pens to forward views which they advocated as private citizens. I have in my mind specially one gentleman—Sir Thomas Farrer—who scarcely allowed a month to pass without taking part in political controversies in periodicals. No objection has ever been taken, nor has any President of the Board of Trade, though opposed to him in politics, had occasion to find fault with Sir Thomas Farrer in the course he pursued. I think I have said enough to show that the Government will discourage partizanship on the part of Civil servants, and it must be left to the Heads of Departments to determine at present whether that partizanship is unfair or not.

With reference to this Question, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been directed to the fact that occurred in the same Department, that Mr. George Fottrell was dismissed by his Predecessors in the Irish Office because he expressed a slight opinion in favour of a certain provision of the Land Act; and is he, on the face of that precedent, going to dismiss one man because he expresses an opinion on one side, and retain another man because he has expressed very much greater partizanship on the other side?

I have no knowledge of the circumstances under which Mr. George Fottrell was dismissed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman cause inquiry, because this is a matter of considerable importance? I will ask the Chief Secretary will he cause inquiry into the matter, so that the Irish people may not be led to believe that a man who had displayed partizanship in favour of the Unionist Party would escape censure, while a man who expressed an opinion on the other side would be dismissed from his office?

If the hon. Member will put a Question on the Paper for Monday, I shall be ready to answer him.

I will do so.

There is a Blue Book on the subject issued in 1881.

Order, order!

Is there any objection to issue a Rule for the whole of the Civil Service, applying not only to the Heads of Departments but also to the lower officials?

I object to answer a Question affecting a large number of loyal servants of the Crown without Notice.

I shall ask the Question to-morrow.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, When he will nominate the Royal Commission which the Government have promised, to inquire into the system of administration at the War Office and Admiralty; and, if he will give the names of those who are to serve on it, and state the earliest date on which it is expected the Commission will meet?

, in reply, said, the noble and gallant Lord would see that the importance of the Commission was very great, and therefore the Government must exercise considerable care in the selection of the gentlemen who were to be nominated. He was unable to say when the Commission would be nominated; but no time would be lost in coming to a decision upon the matter.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he will instruct the Labour Bureau to prepare, for the information of the House and the country, a Return of the number of skilled artizans and mechanics engaged in the leading industries of the country who have acquired a knowledge of their various crafts by means of indentured apprenticeships?

(who replied) said: It would be impossible accurately to ascertain the number of workmen who have been trained under indentures, without a special Census of all the artizans and mechanics in the United Kingdom, which the Labour Bureau has no statutory powers of enforcing. I am informed that the system of indentured apprenticeships has for many years been gradually falling into disuse, although it is still, to a very limited extent, in existence.

said, the Labour Bureau was in touch with organized bodies of working men, and he thought the information might be obtained by means of such organizations.

said, that was a very much smaller question than was implied in the one in print. He thought the number of artizans with whom the Labour Bureau was in communication amounted to not more than 140,000. Of course, the statistics relating to so small a number would be comparatively of very little value. He would communicate with Mr. Burnett on the subject.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Her Majesty's Government are prepared to afford facilities for discussing the Metropolis Local Government Bill, or for dealing with the subject?

, in reply, said, that he greatly regretted that the hon. Member had been unable to secure time on the previous day for the discussion of the Metropolis Local Government Bill; but he would perceive from the state of Public Business that the Government were unable to afford facilities for the discussion of a subject which was of such importance that it required to be taken up by the Government of the day. He hoped to be able in a short time to state the views of Her Majesty's present Government upon the matter.

said: Before the hon. Members' Questions reached me I had already set on foot inquiries as to what remedy could be found for the temporary inconvenience caused by the block on the French Railway. I understand that prompt steps are being taken to remove that block, and that the normal mail service with France may be expected to be resumed very soon. But should the obstruction unfortunately continue, the Post Office is devising with the contractors for the Channel Service means for preventing, as far as possible, delays in the mail service.

Can the First Lord of the Treasury inform the House on what day, and for how long, the House will adjourn for the Easter holidays?

It is not in my power positively to inform the House when I shall be able to ask it to rise for the Easter holidays; but I hope, if the course of Business should permit, that we may adjourn after a Morning Sitting on Tuesday, the 27th instant, until, I think, the Thursday in the following week.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland a Question of which he had given private Notice, Whether he could lay on the Table of the House, before the discussion on the arrears; question next Wednesday, any further information as to the working of the 30th section of the Land Act of last Session, especially as regards the way in which arrears had been dealt with by the County Court Judges?

Yes, Sir; that is a subject upon which I am endeavouring to collect information. As the hon. Gentleman is probably aware, it rests with the clerks of the Court to supply it, and I cannot get it direct from my own officials; therefore, I cannot insure having all the information which I desire to lay before the House; but I have received information with regard to certain counties, and that, together with any other information that I am able to lay before the House, I shall be glad to produce.

I beg to claim the indulgence of the House whilst I bring before it what seems to be a Breach of the Privileges of this House. A few days ago the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere) brought forward an Amendment in Committee of Supply to reduce the amount required for Special Missions. A certain number of hon. Members of this House went into the Lobby and voted with the hon. Member in favour of that reduction. The result of that has been that an Association calling itself the National Radical Union has sent a letter to the constituents of those hon. Members who voted with the hon. Member for Northampton, and it is in this letter, Sir, that I think the Breach of Privilege lies. That, Sir, is a question which you will be able to decide, I will read the letter, and then, with the permission of the House, make a few remarks upon it. It is issued from Birmingham, and is as follows:—

I beg to move that this letter is a Breach of the Privileges of this House.

It seems to me that there is not even a primâ facie case of Privilege.