asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether any advances for the purchase of their holdings under Lord Ashbourne's Land Purchase Act have been made to tenants in districts which were disturbed at the time of such advances being sanctioned; whether, since these advances have been made, the work of the police in maintaining order has been rendered less difficult; whether he has information to show that in such districts an increased desire is now evinced among those who have not availed themselves yet of the benefits of the Act to do so; and, further, if the proportion of arrears still outstanding in such districts is on as low a scale proportionately as over the rest of Ireland?

I find that it is the case that in disturbed districts where advances have been made to tenants under the Land Purchase Act, these districts have shown improvement, and a strong disinclination is evinced by the new owners to join Secret Societies or take part in any agitation. The Land Purchase Commissioners also report that in all districts where sales were effected in the earlier stages of the Act there is an increasing desire to purchase. The reply to the concluding portion of the Question appears to be in the affirmative.

asked, on whose authority the right hon. Gentleman made these statements; and whether he had sought for information from the Land Commissioners or the police?

I have sought information from all the sources from which I thought it could be obtained.

wished to know whether they were to understand that the right hon. Gentleman's information was based on any statement made to him by the Land Commissioners?

The opinion of the Land Commission, among other opinions, is worthy of consideration; but I do not propose to state to the House, in answer to a Question, the sources from which I derive my information.

inquired, whether it was not the fact that the tenants who purchased their holdings under Lord Ashbourne's Act were now complaining that the prices which they paid were altogether too high?

I have not heard anything of the kind. I have received no information to that effect.

asked, whether the right hon. Gentleman was able now to state what the intentions of the Government were with regard to providing further funds for enabling the Commis- sioners under the Land Purchase Act to carry on the work which had proved so successful in the past?

As the answer to this Question is apparently to be made the basis for further legislation on the question of land purchase, I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will lay upon the Table a Return in support of the views which he has put forward in regard to these districts?

The hon. Gentleman is perfectly aware that we cannot support by Returns all the views which we may put forward in this House; that is not, from the nature of the case, possible. I have not given my answer as the basis of further legislation. When we propose further legislation to the House—which, I may say in answer to my hon. Friend, it is the intention of the Government to do in the course of the Session—I do not say before the Recess, but before the Prorogation—when I bring forward the Bill, I shall state the grounds upon which we shall ask the House to accept our proposals.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been drawn to the appointment recently made by the Grand Jury of County Antrim of a county cess collector for the Barony of Lower Toome; whether the gentleman appointed, Mr. Richard Davidson, had offered to collect these rates at 9d. in the £1, while the unsuccessful candidate, Mr. John Hill, was prepared to collect the same rates at 4½d. in the £1; whether it is the fact that Mr. Hill had been the sub-collector for some years for the rates in this barony, and if any complaint was ever made against him as to the manner in which his work was done, or if any objection was raised as to the character of the security now offered on his behalf; whether the collector now appointed holds his position for one year only, or for any specially defined time; and, if he will urge upon the Grand Jury the duty of carefully considering, in the interests of the ratepayers, the rate of poundage paid to collectors appointed?

I have no official knowledge of the matters referred to in the Question, inasmuch as the Government have no control over the actions, whether administrative or judicial, of Grand Juries. I, however, caused the Question to be brought under the notice of the Secretary to the Grand Jury in case they desired to make any observations. He informed me that the Grand Jury were discharged several days ago; that Mr. Hill held no appointment under them, but a private position under their collector; also that the collectors of cess hold their position from one Assize to the next only, and that the Grand Jury have appointed a Committee to consider what rate of remuneration should, in future, be given to cess collectors, the Committee to report at next Assizes. I further understand that, in considering the applications of Messrs. Dawson and Hill for appointment, the question of poundage rate did not arise, inasmuch as the then existing rate of 9d. had been fixed for some years past, in accordance with the recommendation made by a former Committee of the Grand Jury which inquired into the matter.

desired to ask whether it was not a fact that the gentleman who was appointed was appointed at the rate of 9d. in the £1 to collect the cess; whereas the gentleman who was not appointed had offered to collect it at 4½d. in the £1?

said, he was afraid he could not answer that Question without Notice; but if the hon. Gentleman wished it he would put a further Question to the Secretary of the Grand Jury on the matter.

pointed out that Notice of this Question was comprised in the Notice on the Paper.

supposed then that the Grand Jury did not think it necessary to give him the information. He had no control over that Body.

asked the Solicitor General for Ireland, whether the accounts of the Grand Juries in Ireland were not audited by a public auditor; and if it was not in the power of the auditor to surcharge the Grand Jury in such a case as this, where they corruptly paid double the necessary sum to an official; and also whether it was not in the power of the Judges at Assize to disallow these over charges?

said, it was not the function of the auditor to go behind the appointments made made by the Grand Jury.

asked, was it not a fact that in the case of Municipal Bodies the Local Government Board claimed the power of surcharging under similar circumstances?

said, that was a different case altogether. The auditor must go on the basis that this is a proper and legal appointment, and he could not possibly go behind the action of the Grand Jury in that respect.

said, that amongst the papers which had been sent in to him since he put this Question was the actual tender made to collect the cess at the rate of 4½d. in the £1, which he now held in his hand.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Why, in such cases as the laying down of a telegraphic cable between Halifax and the great Atlantic arsenal, port, and depôt of Bermuda, and in other similarly urgent cases of essential necessity, the Government do not act upon the recommendation of the late Select Committee on Harbours, and raise the money needed by the issue of Terminable Annuities having 99 years to run?

, in reply, said, he could not conceive any course that would be more contrary to sound finance than to borrow on Annuities having 99 years to run for a submarine cable between Halifax and Bermuda, the life of which would be infinitely shorter than that of the loan.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he is aware that the Justices at Stratford Petty Ses- sions on Friday, July 13, are reported to have sentenced Charles Edwards, aged 10, to be sent to a reformatory school for six years; and, whether, inasmuch as the 29 & 30 Vict. c. 117, s. 14, limits the power of Justices in such cases to not more than five years, he will take any action in the matter?

, in reply, said, the sentence passed on Charles Edwards was in excess of the statutory power, and was wholly void; and he had, therefore, been compelled reluctantly to order the boy's discharge.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Government will make such representations to the French Government as will ensure some compensation being given to the crew of the Nith, run down in the Tagus on April 7, 1884; whether the crew have, by this collision, lost all their effects; and, whether it would be possible to persuade the French Government to act in the same generous spirit that actuated the Government in making compensation for the damage done by H.M.S. Sultan, under similar circumstances?

The facts of the case are well-known to the Secretary of State, and were brought to his notice by the owners of the Nith about six months ago. They are as stated in a Question to the First Lord of the Admiralty on Monday last. It was explained to the owners that there is no ground for diplomatic interference in the case, which we believe to have been decided in the Court of Appeal at Rouen according to law. It would not be proper to ask the French Government to make voluntary compensation to the owners of the Nith, as Her Majesty's Government made a compassionate grant to the sufferers by the accident in the Tagus referred to, seeing that in the present ease the ship which caused the damage was the property, not of the State, but of a private Company. The hon. Member will see that Her Majesty's Government could not ask Parliament to make a grant on account of the loss of a French vessel through the act of a British Steamship Company which had successfully defended itself in an action at law.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether it is the custom of the Government to take any note of charges of misconduct made against individuals holding commissions in the Naval Reserve; and, whether an individual against whom such charges have been made, to the knowledge of the Government, can still in times of emergency obtain a command in Her Majesty's Navy?

Up to the present time I am not aware that any charges of misconduct have been brought against any officers of the Royal Naval Reserve. The Admiralty are empowered, under the Regulations, to dismiss from the Service any officer against whom a charge derogatory to his position as such has been substantiated. This punishment, if incurred, would debar him from employment in Her Majesty's Navy, either in command or otherwise.

asked Mr. Solicitor General, Whether he is aware that no dividend has been paid to the creditors of the West London Commercial Bank since March 12 last; whether it is a fact that the official liquidator has been for some time in a position to pay a second dividend of 4s. 6d. in the £1; and, whether he will bring pressure to bear upon the liquidator to pay such second dividend at once, and further dividends as quickly as may be possible?

, in reply, said, that since March last a dividend of 8s. in the £1 had been paid to the creditors of the bank, and considerable progress had been made in the winding up. In the course of a few days a further dividend would be paid, which, with that already paid, would make a total of 13s. in the £1. Every diligence was being used by the liquidator in the matter.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he will grant a Return of the number of persons charged with offences under the Cattle Diseases Acts during the 12 months ending July 31, 1888, showing the names of the persons charged; the nature of the alleged offences; the counties in which they occurred; the decision of the Court in each case; and the names of the magistrates who adjudicated thereon?

, in reply, said, he found that the preparation of a Return of the nature suggested would involve obtaining Reports from each of upwards of 600 Petty Sessions Clerks, while, apparently, the object of the Return was mainly to further an attack which was recently made on the decisions come to by a particular magistrate in the execution of a particular discretion conferred by statute. He, therefore, did not consider it a Return which the Government could consent to give.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether Mr. Alan Cole's lectures on design in respect of Irish lace making, and his inspections of Art classes at lace making centres in Ireland, as reported in recent Annual Reports of the Department of Science and Art, have been permanently discontinued; whether the Irish Government and the Local Committees of the lace making schools and convents in Ireland have urged that the lectures and inspections should be continued; and, whether directions will be given for the continuance of Mr. Cole's lectures and inspections?

, in reply, said, that, as the hon. Gentleman was aware, a lady Inspectress had been appointed, and it was believed that it would be unnecessary, therefore, to continue the inspec- tion by Mr. A. Cole. He thought, however, that arrangements might be made under which Mr. Cole should continue to give some lectures; though the Treasury would think it necessary to limit the number.

asked the Lord Advocate, Whether he will agree to the insertion of a clause into the Clerks of Session Bill providing for the appointment of a Depute by the Principal Sheriff Clerk, subject to the concurrence of the Lord Advocate, with a salary and pension payable by the Exchequer; and providing, further, that when a vacancy occurs in the Principal Clerkship a Depute shall be promoted to the office?

The matter referred to in the hon. and gallant Member's Question is one which is engaging my attention already; but I do not think it could be suitably dealt with in the Bill he refers to, which relates solely to the Court of Session.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a Petition, signed by British residents, bankers, and merchants in Java has been forwarded to the Secretary of State, setting forth the hardships to which they are exposed in the shape of compulsory military service in the Auxiliary Force called the Schuttery; whether all able-bodied Europeans and Eurasians in Java are enrolled in this Force; whether those physically incapacitated are taxed in lieu of service; whether those enrolled have to submit to be drilled by barefooted natives; whether non-attendance at drill are punished by fine and imprisonment; whether the United States Government have interfered to protect American citizens; and, whether the Government intend to do anything in the matter?

I have already answered more than one similar Question. Ac- cording to the information in the possession of Her Majesty's Government the first, second, and fourth Questions must be answered in the affirmative; as to the third and the fifth we have no information. As I have before stated, there is nothing in the Treaties between this country and the Netherlands to exempt British subjects resident in Dutch Colonies from service in the Militia.

, further asked, if it were a fact that the Europeans in Java only formed about 10 per cent of the population; that though of these only a very small proportion were British subjects, yet they were practically the chief sources of revenue; whether they were subject to a ridiculous and vexatious system of fines; and whether they had to provide their own uniform?

said, he had no information about these particulars. Whatever their numbers were, British citizens living in a Dutch Colony must submit to the same obligations as the rest of the population.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he has yet been able to arrive at a satisfactory decision with regard to the arrears of pension due to pensioner Williams?

It has be arranged that, pensioner Williams having been officially informed that he would receive arrears of pension amounting to £30 18s. 4d., this sum shall be paid to him. It is the circumstance that notice was officially given to this pensioner that his arrears would be paid, though without the sanction of the Treasury, which forms the special feature in his case; and it, therefore, affords no precedent for the admission of similar claims in other instances.

asked the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, Whether the following letter, dated January 27, 1888, from the Education Department to the Clerk of the School Board for London, was written with his knowledge and approval:—

"Sir,

Adverting to your letter of the 24th inst., P.M. 7 2 4/8 8, I am directed to state that My Lords, in conducting the business of the Education Department, must act upon the ordinary rule that they notice only communications which are approved by the School Board. My Lords have no knowledge of, or concern with, the arrangements by which the School Board delegate their authority to Committees, nor can the Department accept the office of determining whether a Committee is or is not authorized to make any particular communication.

If the Committee is acting within their authority it is the School Board who direct a letter to be written; if the Committee exceeds its authority the Communication is futile, and ought not to be answered.

It is for the Committee to take upon themselves the responsibility of stating that the School Board have authorized or directed the communication to be made.

I have the honour to be, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

P. Cumin;"

whether it was with his knowledge and approval that the following letter, dated July 4, was also sent from the Education Department to the Clerk to the London School Board:—

"Sir,

Referring to your letter, S.M. 13824/88, dated June 23, 1888, in which it is stated that the letter dated June 19 has been laid before the Board, and that you are directed by the School Board to forward to this Department a statement of————, I am to point out that at the meeting of the School Board, on June 21, the Board negatived a Resolution to allow the letter of the Department, dated June 19, to be read, and therefore it would appear that substantially that letter was not laid before the School Board.

With reference to the statement that you were directed by the School Board to forward the statement of————, I am to point out that on June 21 the letter of this Department, dated the 19th, was referred to the School Management Committee for their consideration and report. On June 23 it is alleged that you received the instruction of the School Board to reply. As the School Board held no meeting between June 21 and June 23, My Lords are at a loss to understand how any instruction could have been given by the Board until a meeting was held at some later period.

I am to request an explanation, and at the same time to express the desire of My Lords that this letter may be brought specifically to the notice of the School Board, so that they may have an opportunity of discussing it.

(Signed) P. Cumin;"

and, whether the Education Department claims to inquire into, or to regulate the internal procedure of, the School Board for London in the transaction of its business, and in the proper delegation of its authority to its duly constituted Committees; and, if so, to what extent, or by virtue of what power conferred upon it by the Education Acts, or by any other statute, or otherwise; if so, why was the letter of January 27 written to the Board; if not, why was the letter of July 4 written to the Board?

The object of the letter dated January 27, 1888, was to inform the Board that any official letters addressed to the Department must be written by the authority of the School Board, and not merely of a Committee. This Rule is now invariably acted upon. As to the letter of July 4, its object was to obtain some explanation of the fact that, while on one hand the Official Minutes of the School Board—which are, and always have been, regularly furnished to the Department—showed that the Board had not authorized any answer to the Department's letter of June 19, on the other hand, the School Board's letter of the 23rd declared that it had been written by the authority of the Board. The Department have since received an explanation from the School Board admitting that the letter of the 23rd was sent without the Board's authority, which, however, was given by them on June 28. I need hardly say that the Education Department make no such claim as that stated in the last paragraph of the Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, at the Vandeleur evictions last week, when Patrick, Thomas, Ellen, and Mary Cleary issued from a cabin to which entrance had been effected by the Emergency men, Mr. Cecil Roche, R.M., ordered the police to bring the above persons before him, seated himself on a stone wall, and committed them to prison; and, what are the Rules in force with respect to the times at, and places in, which Resident Magistrates have to perform their judicial functions?

I am informed that the facts are as stated in the Question, with the somewhat important exception that the women were not, as alleged, committed to prison. The duty of a magistrate requires him to deal on the spot with breaches of the peace committed in his presence.

asked, in what capacity Mr. Cecil Roche was acting in these evictions; and, also, whether it was not the fact, as reported, that on seeing a man looking out of a window in one of the houses that gentleman said—"I see you, you rascal; you will surely have to go to gaol;" and, whether Mr. Cecil Roche made that observation in his capacity of a magistrate?

said, he had no grounds for believing the allegations that had been made against the magistrate.

asked, what order Mr. Cecil Roche had made on the occasion in question?

said, he did not know.

asked, whether Mr. Cecil Roche was not in charge of the police on the occasion referred to?

said, that he must ask the hon. Member to give Notice of his Question.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, at the Petty Sessions at Abbeyfeale, on July 18, an Emergency man named James Lee, employed by Lord Guillamore, was convicted of presenting a loaded revolver at certain persons, and of being drunk whilst in the possession of loaded fire-arms; whether, on the same occasion, an Emergency man named Mullinock was also convicted of being drunk whilst in the possession of loaded fire-arms; whether the Resident Magistrate remarked that these men came from the Property Defence Association, and on the recommendation of their employer obtained licences to carry arms, which they abused; whether the licences of these men have been revoked; and, whether the Government will give such instructions with respect to licences for fire-arms as will prevent such cases in the future?

said, before the right hon. Gentleman answered that Question, he should ask the permission of the House to read a passage from a letter which he had received from the Rev. William Casey, the priest at Abbeyfeale.

Order, order! That is not in Order on the Question.

then asked the Chief Secretary, whether he was aware that there were eight or 10 of these Emergency men at Abbeyfeale; and whether the people of the district were not in terror of their lives of them; and whether, as a fact, no interference whatever had been made by the people of Abbeyfeale with regard to these Emergency men?

, in reply, said, he was afraid he could not answer the Question. With regard to the Question on the Paper, he was informed that the facts were substantially as stated in the first two paragraphs. As regarded the third paragraph, he was informed that neither of the men was employed by the Property Defence Association. The licences of these two men were about to be revoked; and every care has been and will be taken by those responsible to secure, as far as possible, that licences are issued to proper persons only.

asked, if the right hon. Gentleman denied that evidence was given to satisfy the magistrate that these men did belong to the Property Defence Association?

said, he was informed that they were not.

From whom did the right hon. Gentleman get that information?

Order, order!

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whom they were employed by, for there are two cognate Associations, each of which is always repudiating the acts of the other?

I do not know that they were employed by any Association.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true, as stated in a daily paper, that the Chief Secretary for Ireland is supplied with information, by telegraph, at stated periods, regarding the health of Mr. John Dillon, who is now in prison; and whether the right hon. Gentleman would have any objection to lay these bulletins upon the Table of the House?

Of course, the health of the hon. Member for East Mayo has been carefully looked after since his committal to prison. But there is no truth in the newspaper statement.

asked, if it was the intention of the Irish Government to appear by counsel before the Court of Exchequer in Ireland to oppose the making absolute of the conditional order for a writ of habeas corpus in the case of Mr. John Dillon's imprisonment.

said, this was a matter which was left entirely to the discretion of the Attorney General for Ireland. As he understood, the Chief Baron considered that only one point had been raised by the affidavit which required to be argued.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, If it is the case that the course of special instruction and ultimate examination hitherto required and passed by officers of the Indian Army Medical Service is to be abolished; whether the statement of the officer at the head of the Medical Service concerning the proposed change in the Bengal Presidency, quoted by The British Medical Journal, July 21, 1883, is correct—namely, that it is no longer necessary; what reasons are given for such change by the Indian Government; and, whether it is intended to substitute any other course for that it is proposed to abolish?

With regard to the first and second para- graphs of the hon. Member's Question, I have to state that no such decision has been arrived at. The matter is still under the consideration of the Secretary of State and the Government of India. In answer to the third paragraph, I have to state that the reason given in favour of change is that the special instruction can be given better and at less expense in India. In answer to the fourth paragraph, I have to state that if the present course were abolished a course of special instruction would be given in India.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether there is any Rule of the Board of National Education in Ireland under which a female teacher is prohibited from living in the same house with her father or husband, if the dwelling happens to be a licensed premises?

The National Education Commissioners inform me that there is a fixed Rule prohibiting teachers from keeping, or living in, public-houses, or houses for the sale of spirituous liquors.

asked Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, Whether all the Roman Catholic special jurors in Queen's County have recently been ordered to stand aside without cause shown, and for no other apparent reason than that they are Roman Catholics; whether of the entire population of the county 88 per cent are Roman Catholics; whether he is aware that a strong feeling of indignation exists among the special jurors; whether he is aware that a respectful but firm protest was presented on the 12th instant to Mr. Justice Johnson, the going Judge of Assize; whether the learned Judge told the Memorialists that the thing was "no business of his;" whether he will say whose business it is; and, whether he will take steps to prevent the exclusion of Roman Catholic jurors for the future?

I am informed that the statements in the first and third paragraphs of the Question are entirely without foundation. A protest was presented to the going Judge of Assize, with the result stated in the Question; but the signatories to this protest were entirely mistaken in supposing that they, or any other jurors, were ordered to stand aside on account of their religion. No inquiries whatever were made as to the religion of jurors, nor is there any foundation for the suggestion that jurors were excluded because they were Roman Catholics. In reply to the sixth paragraph of the Question, I have to say that the Crown Solicitor's action as to jurors is regulated by a Code of Rules which was settled by the then Attorney General in 1867, and which has been since then adopted by his Successors in Office, and that the Crown Solicitors are responsible to the Attorney General for the observance of these Rules.

asked whether, as a matter of fact, all the Catholic jurors, as they were called, were ordered to stand aside by the Crown in the case of a change of venue?

said, that he had no information on the point.

asked, if the Rules on the matter would be presented to the House?

replied that if the hon. Gentleman wished for the Rules on this particular subject he would have no objection to lay them on the Table.

said, that in consequence of the unsatisfactory answer of the hon. and learned Gentleman, he begged to give Notice that he should draw attention to this subject on the Vote on Account for the Civil Service Estimates.

asked, whether the hon. and learned Gentleman was in a position to state how many Roman Catholic jurors were summoned on these juries, and how many were ordered to stand aside?

Cetainly not, because no inquiry was made as to their religion.

asked, whether the hon. and learned Gentleman would grant a Return giving the information?

No, Sir.

, who had the following Question on the Paper:—To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he is aware that at the last Assizes held at Wicklow all Catholic jurors were excluded from the jury box in capital cases by the action of the Crown; and, whether any steps can be taken to prevent a recurrence of such exclusion?—asked, on a point of Order, whether the phrase "jury packing" was not an ordinary term? The last paragraph in the Question had been altered by the phrase "jury packing" being struck out.

If I recollect aright, the term in which the hon. Gentleman used the expression was invidious. There was something besides these words if I recollect aright; but I am speaking from memory.

I should really wish to know whether the terms of my Question put on the Paper were out of Order? I have not a copy of the Question with me; but, as well as I remember, the exact words were "whether the system commonly called jury packing prevailed?"

If I recollect aright, the term used by the hon. Gentleman was invidious. I am speaking from memory, and the words were whether the system commonly called jury-packing was habitually enforced in the county? I thought that expression ought not to appear on the Paper, and I think so now.

then asked the Question as it stood on the Paper.

I have no knowledge of the religious denominations of jurors at last Wicklow Assizes.

Arising out of this Question, I wish to ask whether it is not an extraordinary coincidence that in almost every part of Ireland the Catholics are excluded from the juries?

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman——

Order, order! I must say it seems to me that the practice of putting supplemental Questions is being greatly abused to-day.

Might I be allowed to say, Sir——

Order, order! Mr. Maurice Healy.

What I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, in reference to the ignorance of the religion of the jury, is this—whether he is aware that the present Justice Holmes, when Irish Attorney General, was in a position to state to the Court of Queen's Bench what the relative religious beliefs of the jury panel was as a ground for not changing the venue from Omagh?

That Question does not arise out of the Question on the Paper; and, in the next place, it is not a Question I can answer.

asked the Secretary of State to the Home Department, Whether it is correctly reported that in a Report from one of the Inspectors of Prisons there occurs the following description regarding the want of accommodation for prisoners awaiting trial at the Manchester City Court:—

"In one of these rooms I saw 37 men huddled together, some sitting, others standing or leaning against the iron bars, looking out, talking and muttering words to one another that sounded very like oaths. In the middle of this crowd was a soldier in uniform, standing as far from the others as he could. In the women's room there were 18 associated. As many as 40 or 50 men, and from 20 to 30 women, occupy these rooms at a time;

and, whether any steps have been taken to remedy this state of things?

, in reply, said, the Report was correctly quoted. Soon after the Report was made he placed himself in communication with the Mayor of Manchester, and plans prepared by the city serveyor were now under the consideration of the authorities. He had further written to the Mayor suggesting that, pending the completion of the alterations, every endeavour should be made to remedy, by careful management, the state of things to which attention had been drawn.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Guardians of the Macroom District have recently commenced to build a cottage, under the Labourers' Acts (Ireland), on a farm at Glownaglough, near Coachford, County Cork, formerly occupied by Denis Gleeson; whether, in order to recover the land, Denis Gleeson's landlord forgave £200 of arrears, paid a debt of £17, and gave Gleeson £32 10s., as well as his stock, to enable him to emigrate to America; whether, after Gleeson's return, he was supported by the local branch of the National League in a "Land League hut;" whether frequent outrages have taken place, in consequence of which the landlord has been unable to let the farm, and two policemen have been engaged on protection duty on it; whether, in December, 1887, Denis Gleeson was sentenced to 25 years' penal servitude for manslaughter of a man named Hayes; whether Mrs. Gleeson has been bound over several times to keep the peace at the Court at Coachford; whether she is the proposed occupant of the cottage now being erected; and, whether, since she has no children old enough to do agricultural work, and considering the agitation and disturbance caused by her presence, the Local Government Board in Ireland will take steps to secure the ratepayers from a misuse of the machinery of the Labourers' Acts?

The facts are all as stated by my hon. Friend. In my opinion, those facts show a gross abuse of the powers given under the Labourers' Act; and I greatly regret the Government have no power to interfere.

Is he still in prison.

As he was sentenced in 1887 to 25 years' penal servitude, I should think he is.

Is it not a fact that the Gleesons' rent was nearly double the valuation; that he spent a considerable sum of money in improving his land; and that, in spite of these facts, he was driven cruelly from his farm and thrown on the roadside?

inquired, whether there had been any abuse by Local Authorities of the powers under the Act in which there was not an appeal to the Privy Council?

And was not the building of this cottage actually approved by the Local Government Board Inspector?

Yes; but the question is not as to the building of the cottage, but as to the use which was made of it afterwards.

It has not been built yet.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, in the Killybegs Petty Sessions District of the County of Donegal, there is not one Catholic magistrate, although more than 90 per cent of the population of the district are Roman Catholics; and, whether Her Majesty's Government will take steps to remedy this grievance?

I have no knowledge of the religious denominations of the magistrates in the Petty Sessions district mentioned. But as has already been explained in reply to previous Questions on the subject of the religion of magistrates, the Lord Chancellor of Ireland is always anxious to consider the names of duly qualified Roman Catholics when properly submitted to him for appointment to the Commission of the Peace.

Will the right hon. Gentleman deny that the statement contained in my Question is true—that not one of the magistrates upon the Bench at Killybegs is a Catholic? Will he inquire whether that statement is true?

I will consider the matter. Of course, it is no business of mine. I will consider whether I will make any inquiry.

Are not magistrates appointed by the Lord Chancellor on the recommendation of the Lord Lieutenant of the County? Can the Lord Chancellor appoint on the recommendation of the Lord Lieutenant of the County?

I am afraid I cannot answer the Question in detail. The account the hon. Member has given is sufficient to prove my statement, and I have nothing to add to it.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that Mr. Brownlow, land agent to the Lord Lieutenant, who presided at the Orange demonstration on His Excellency's demesne at Mountstewart, County Down, on the 12th instant, is a Justice of the Peace for the County of Down, and if he will state the date of his appointment to the Commission of the Peace; whether his attention has been directed to the speech of Mr. Brownlow on that occasion, as reported in The Newtownards Chronicle of the 14th instant, where Mr. Brownlow, referring to Home Rule, threatened that—

"Whoever may submit, the Orangemen of Ulster will stand together, and as our ancestors did of old we will if necessary do now;"

whether, as reported in that paper, he also, in introducing to the meeting Mr. Adolphus Vane-Tempest, a cousin of His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, made use of the following words:—

"They (the Orangemen) had His Excellency's best wishes. He could not be here himself, but he had done the next best thing and sent his cousin;"

whether this is the same Mr. Brownlow who was reported in The Belfast Evening Telegraph of April 12, 1887, to have said, at the laying of the foundation stone of an Orange Hall at Barnamaghery, County Down—

"That the time was rapidly approaching when the Irish Question would be transferred from the House of Commons to arbitrament in the field,"

and that the Orangemen should have their forces properly constituted; whether he will call the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the words spoken by this magistrate at these public meetings; and, whether any Government reporter was present at either of these meetings?

I am sorry to say that this is one of a series of Questions which have been put down without sufficient Notice; and if the hon. Gentlemen who put them down will wait until a later day I will endeavour to obtain the necessary information. On this ground I cannot answer Questions 35, 37, 38, 41, 50, 52, 53, nor 54.

I beg to say that I gave Notice of my Question on Tuesday; and I may add that this is not the first occasion on which I have called attention to this subject.

The Question may have been put down on Tuesday; but it is impossible to say that on Thursday I can have got the information.

Perhaps I may be allowed to add——

Order, order!

The second and third paragraphs of my Question (38) have not been answered.

It relates to those paragraphs that I am obliged to say that I have got no information.

I wish to ask you, Mr. Speaker, on a point of Order, whether it is in Order to answer a series of other Questions when a reply to one only was asked for?

The Question is too trivial for me to answer.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that, in the Vandeleur evictions on Wednesday last, 18th instant, possession of the house of Michael Cleary, of Carrowdoty, was obtained by means of a "battering ram," and that the whole back side wall, 30 to 40 feet in length, was battered down; whether he is also aware, that in gaining possession of Cleary's house, and Pat Spellassy's and James Madigan's, of Carnaculla, on the 19th instant, the Sheriff, Mr. Croker, and his Emergency bailiffs tore down their furniture, threw it into the yard, and broke it into pieces; whether he has been informed that the Sheriff was remonstrated with at Spellassy's without effect; whether he will state the statute or authority warranting such destruction of tenants' scant chattels; and, whether, if further evictions occur, he will take steps to prevent such recurrence?

The Divisional Magistrate reports that access was obtained by a battering-ram because the tenants resisted with violence and threw boiling water, the house being strongly barricaded. The wall was battered down, as, owing to strong barricading and violent resistance, it had to be largely breached. All the houses were barricaded and prepared for resistance, and nearly all the furniture had been removed by the tenants. What was left was removed as carefully as possible by Captain Croker's men. The Divisional Magistrate does not know whether the Sheriff was remonstrated with; but he is aware that he always performs his difficult duties with great humanity and moderation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in some cases, the agent and the bailiffs have actually destroyed houses after the people have been put out; and I also wish to ask if the Irish Government are of opinion that the armed forces of the Crown should be engaged in such operations?

I am not aware whether that is the case or not. I may remind the House also that the Question is not one arising out of the original Question.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the fourth paragraph of my Question.

Perhaps I may be allowed to say that, from the answers given to Questions of fact by my right hon. Friend, it appears to rue what was done was done legally. The chattels were carefully removed, and the landlord was entitled to be put in clear possession of the house.

asked, whether it was really a fact that the chattels were removed carefully. He saw thorn with his own eyes thrown out on the road, and he personally remonstrated with the Sheriff for breaking the man's furniture.

asked for Notice of the Question.

I beg to ask, Sir, for an answer, and permit me to say that I have these specific charges on the Paper; and it is most important to my constituents that they should be answered fairly and honourably.

asked, whether the hon. and learned Gentleman would answer the question of law on the supposition that the facts stated by his hon. Friend were correct?

said, that would be a most inconvenient precedent. The question of fact had been clearly and distinctly answered by his right hon. Friend that there was no destruction of property. He answered the question of law, that what occurred was perfectly legal. If further information was wanted with respect to a question of fact, he must ask the hon. Member to put a Question on the Paper.

asked, whether the hon. and learned Gentleman would state that the chattels were carefully removed, inasmuch as his hon. Friend had distinctly stated that he had seen them thrown out on the road? Who gave the right hon. Gentleman his information?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention had been directed to the Resolution which appeared in The Irish Times and Freeman's Journal on Friday the 20th instant, signed by the Very Rev. M. Dinan, D.D., P.P., V.G., Kilrush, and 15 other priests, in whose parishes the Vandeleur property is situated, protesting against the insult alleged to be offered to them by their exclusion from the inner circle at the evictions on the Vandeleur Estate; whether he will state by what law, statute, or authority, these clergymen were so excluded; and, whether he will take steps, should there be any further evictions, to prevent a similar occurrence?

I under stand that a Resolution of the nature indicated has appeared in the news- papers. The ground upon which the Divisional Magistrate felt it his duty to refuse to permit the local Roman Catholic clergy to pass inside the cordon formed by the troops was, as I have already stated in reply to another Question, the fact of their having been (as they also admitted) the authors of the Plan of Campaign upon the estate; and at the commencement of the evictions some of their body have been seen to enter the church and set the bell tolling to assemble the people, notwithstanding that a Proclamation had been issued forbidding an assembly as likely to lead to disturbance. The Divisional Magistrate, in so refusing, acted under the general powers conferred by statute upon magistrates to secure the peaceable carrying out of the law. I cannot undertake to interfere with the administration of the law in the manner suggested in the concluding portion of the Question.

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman if the clergy have solemnly and publicly denied that they had anything to do with the resistance offered; and, also, whether it was much more due to the presence of the clergy than to the armed forces of the Crown that the peace had been preserved among a population so dreadfully excited?

If the hon. Gentleman asks me my opinion—whether my opinion agrees with his—I have to say that it does not.

asked, whether it was not a matter of public notoriety that the priests had done their utmost to bring about a satisfactory settlement and to keep the peace; and that this attitude of theirs had been endorsed by the Local Government Inspector and the brother-in-law of Mr. Vandeleur?

said, his information was that the clergy had not denied having anything to do with the Plan of Campain.

They do deny it.

Well, my information is that they do not deny it. And if that is a fact, there is ample reason, in my opinion, for the action taken by the Divisional Magistrate.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that the priests have not done their very best? Does the right hon. Gentleman not know——?

Order, order!

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What was the nature of the incitement to resistance on which the authorities considered themselves justified in excluding the hon. Member for South Galway from the immediate scene of evictions on the Vandeleur property; what was the occasion of such incitement; and, if any such incitement has been made by the hon. Member, why has not the Government taken proceedings under the provisions of the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act?

As reported in The Freeman's Journal the hon. Member made a speech at Kilrush on May 4 last, in which he said that—

"Mr. Dillon and he had come down to take a look over the battlefield—the Vandeleur Estate—on which the landlords were going to face them in West Clare, and to see if the popular forces were in good order. He had no fear of what the result would be. The Government appeared to imagine that they could support the Union by the same means by which they carried the Union; that they could drive the people of Clare to desperation, and then that Colonel Turner could dragoon them. Let them stick by b the national organization and by the Plan of Campaign."

On July 21 he is reported in The Times to have said that—

"What he himself wanted the world to understand was that no man would go tamely out of his house; that no man would be so base or so cowardly as not to resist the forces that attempted to root him from his place."

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether he will direct that the map of Richmond Park, now in the Tea Room, showing the site of the rifle ranges proposed by the National Rifle Association, may be exhibited on the hoarding in Westminster Hall, or other convenient place, for inspection by the public and parties interested, together with a definite description of the proposed works and mode of dealing with the same, and the conditions which the Association offer to submit to as regards the use of the same, and as to the closing of the Park; whether he will give some limited time for the public and parties interested to show cause and state objections against the proposal before he reports to the Cabinet; whether, on reporting to the Cabinet, he will draw their attention to the question of whether there are or not, as alleged by H.R.H. the Commander-in-Chief, many other more appropriate places for the purpose; and, by what right the paddocks in Richmond Park are enclosed and the public excluded therefrom at all, and to what uses they are applied, and is there any reason why they should not be thrown into the Park proper, of which they form a part?

I cannot agree with my hon. Friend that Westminster Hall would be a convenient place for exhibiting the map of Richmond Park now in the Tea Room, where, I think, it may well remain. I shall, with pleasure, lay on the Table of the House a copy of the latest application of the National Rifle Association. As to the second paragraph of the Question, I have already made a Report to the Cabinet; but I shall at any time be glad to confer with my hon. Friend upon the subject, and to send forward any further views he may have to suggest. As to the third paragraph, the question it raises is not one with which I have officially any right to interfere; and as to the last paragraph, the paddocks have always been reserved for the purpose of growing hay and roots for the use of the deer, and a discretion to keep them so enclosed is left to me by the Parks Regulation Act, 1873. I do not think it would be desirable to make any change in that respect at present.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Is the Dr. MacCabe at present attending the inquest at Mitchelsown the same who fills the office of Medical Commissioner of the Local Government Board; and, if so, why was he sent to examine the political prisoners in Tullamore Gaol; whether he has had his attention directed to the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Prisons, Ireland, 1883–4, in which they advise an improved diet for prisoners, and state,—

"It should always be borne in mind that the medical officer of a prison, when he sees fit, may alter or add to the diet of any prisoner whose health seems to require attention;"

whether this recommendation was adopted; and, whether a Circular was issued by Dr. MacCabe, while a member of the Prisons Board, to the medical officers of Irish Prisons, requesting them to report in favour of the old scale of diet, which the Royal Commission had unanimously condemned?

Dr. MacCabe now fills the office of Medical Commissioner of the Local Government Board. When he visited Tullamore, he was medical member of the Prison Board. The recommendation of the Royal Commission has been adopted. I need hardly add that no such Circular as that alluded to was ever issued.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether any communication has been received by the Irish Board of Works from the Grand Jury of the County of Cork, in reply to the communication sent by the Board of Works on the 20th instant to that Body; what was the reply; and, whether it is a fact that several gentlemen on the Grand Jury, who had personally examined the structure in question, expressed their unqualified condemnation thereof, and approved the judgment and professional ability of Mr. Kirby, M.A., C.E., the surveyor for the County of Cork?

I have answered several Questions relating to this harbour and pier. There appears to be a conflict of opinion—[Dr. TANNER: Hear, hear!]—between certain members of the Grand Jury and the Board of Works of Ireland. I have no reason to doubt the correctness of the information which has been supplied to me previously; but I have asked for a special Report.

Is it not a fact that the Grand Jury of the county of Cork is exclusively composed of the most ultra Tories?

I have no information on that point.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to are port published in The Belfast Morning News of the 23rd instant of a meeting of the Ulster Land Committee, held in Belfast on Friday last, under the presidency of Samuel Black, Esq., J.P., at which a resolution was adopted expressing alarm and apprehension in view of the prospect of the enormous number of evictions in Ireland, and appealing—

"To Parliament to adopt measures calculated to arrest the injustice and suffering which are likely to ensue from such lamentable proceedings;"

and, whether, considering that a large number of these evictions are in consequence of the non-payment of the old rents, which the landlords are endeavouring to exact from tenants who are entitled to the benefit of the fair rents, he will take steps to prevent evictions in respect of the non-payment of the old rents pending the fixing of the fair rents by the Land Commission?

I have seen the article alluded to; but I have no ground for thinking that the anticipations expressed in the Question are likely to be realized.

Is it not a fact that a large number of Irish landlords are exacting the old rents, pending the fixing of fair rents?

No; I am not aware of that; but I should be very glad to take into consideration any case the hon. Gentleman places before me.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, with reference to the complaints made as to the excessive charges for dues on vessels and cargoes at the harbour of Ardglass, County Down, Whether he has yet considered the matter, and if he can state what changes are proposed to be made?

I have investigated the charges of the Ardglass Harbour, and I find they compare favourably with the charges in other deep water harbours on the East Coast, such as Arklow and Wicklow; hut they are far from meeting the annual charge of maintenance, still less for the making of any provision for paying off the debt on the harbour. In 1885–6 the receipts were £104, and the expenditure £761; in 1886–7 the receipts were £162, and the expenditure £816; in 1887–8 the receipts were £249, and the expenditure £848. These figures, although they show a progressive increase of receipts, do not justify me in recommending a reduction of the dues.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware whether, in the case of the Ardglass Harbour, there are any charges which prevent an increase of the receipts?

No, Sir; I do not think the figures I have quoted justify that conclusion, because the receipts show a continuous increase. In the two years they have more than doubled.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Sergeant Fletcher, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, acted as bailiff guiding the evicting force on the Vandeleur Estate to the various homesteads; whether, in this work, he was driven on a police car and accompanied by two other members of the Force; whether his duty at these evictions was confined to the preservation of the peace; and, what rule of the Police Code permitted him to fulfil the duties of estate bailiff?

, in reply, said, that the Divisional Magistrate reported that neither Sergeant Fletcher nor any other member of the Constabulary acted as bailiff. A protecting force was sent to a certain townland, and the local police guided the force there.

Are we to understand that it is the duty of the police to guide these eviction parties?

said, he should imagine that it was consistent with the duty of the police to do so.

When we come to the payment of the sergeant, the landlord will find that he will have to pay him.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Dr. James Barr, at present attending the Mitchelstown inquest as a witness on behalf of the Irish Prisons Board, holds any office under the Home Office; if so, what is the office; is he the same medical man who visited the political prisoners in Tullamore Gaol last winter; if so, by whose direction did he visit them; did he make any Report of the result of his visit to the Irish Authorities; and, if he did, will the right hon. Gentleman produce his Report for the information of the House; did he visit other gaols in Ireland and make Reports thereon; and, if so, will those Reports also be produced; is he the same person who, representing himself as a medical man, recently visited Mr. John Dillon in Dundalk Gaol; if so, by whose direction did he make the visit and for what purpose, and what Report, if any, has he made of his visit; did he refuse to give his name to Mr. John Dillon when demanding that the hon. Member should submit himself to his examination; did Mr. Dillon refuse to submit to such examination unless furnished with some credentials by his visitor; and, was it by the instructions of the Government that Dr. Barr desired to keep his name and purposes secret?

Dr. Barr is medical officer of Kirkdale Prison, Liverpool. He visited prisoners convicted under the Crimes Act in Tulla- more last year by direction of the Government. He did make a Report upon the subject. As at present advised, I do not propose to lay these Reports upon the Table. Such a course would be contrary to universal practice, and might form a very undesirable precedent. He visited, in addition to Tullamore, Limerick, Clonmel, Cork, Wexford, and Londonderry Prisons. By the order of the Government he recently visited Mr. John Dillon. I am not aware whether he refused his name. Mr. Dillon did decline to submit to examination.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why he did not send an Irish medical man on this mission, and not cast a suspicion and a slur on a body of honourable men?

Order, order!

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman why he is unable to answer the portion of the Question which states that Dr. Barr refused to give his name to Mr. Dillon?

I have not got any information on the subject. If the hon. Gentleman thinks the matter important he can put a Question down.

asked the Lord Advocate, If he has seen the statement in the Scotch papers that a boy, James O'Neill, sentenced to be whipped at Coatbridge, was sent to Glasgow to receive the whipping; and, whether this was a violation of the Regulations laid down by the Lord Advocate?

The Regulations state that the punishment is to be inflicted in such police office or cell or other suitable place, if possible, within or adjoining the Court House, as shall be fixed by the Sheriff; and the Sheriff is directed to see that such place is provided. But great difficulty arises from its being often impossible to find any person who will undertake the duty in the place where the trial takes place; while the Police Authorities dispute the right of the Lord Advocate to make a Regulation ordering police constables to act. The County Authorities also object to the right of any officer of State to order the punishment to be carried out on their premises.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether agricultural labourers who are hired by the year and occupy houses on the farms on which they are employed, the occupation of such houses being part of their wages, will be entitled to vote for members of the County Council?

, in reply, said, that under the conditions stated in the Question agricultural labourers would be entitled to a vote.

asked, whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that Clerks of the Peace had been advising overseers to omit such occupiers from their lists?

said, he was not aware of the circumstances mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman; but he would inquire into them.

asked, whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that in the North of England a large number of agricultural labourers, who lived in houses as part of their hiring, had been refused in their requests to have their names put on the Register?

said he would inquire.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the P. J. Keenan, whose name appears as signing several recent Dublin Castle Proclamations, is the same person as the paid official of that name, the Resident Commissioner of National Education, Ireland; and, whether, in future, the Government will take steps to put a stop to the practice of requiring a paid official occupying such a position as that of National Education Commissioner from being identified with acts of the Executive Government?

It is not within my province to interfere with the discretion which Privy Councillors may use in the exercise of duties imposed upon the Privy Council by Act of Parliament. But I may inform the hon. Member that Sir Patrick Keenan has signed no Proclamation of the kind to which the hon. Member seems to refer.

As this Gentleman has been turned into a tool of Dublin Castle, I will move at the proper time to strike his salary out of the National Education Estimates.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether he is aware that the four charts furnished by the Admiralty to the Library, for the use of Members during the experimental Naval Manœuvres, are inconveniently small; that upon none of them are the limits within which the operations are to be confined shown; nor are the signal stations which are in telegraphic communication with the Admiralty in any way distinguished; whether he is aware that there is hanging up at Lloyd's a large clear chart upon which the limits of these operations are indicated, and that alongside this chart are exhibited, by reference, a copy of the official programme, the names of the vessels comprising each Division of the Fleet, and all telegrams as they arrive relating to the movements of the Squadrons and ships, while by means of distinguishing pins representing vessels the position of the Squadrons as last reported can be seen at a glance; and, whether, under these circumstances, he will reconsider his decision, and cause such arrangements to be made as will afford Members of this House equal advantages to those provided at Lloyd's for following these important and instructive experimental naval operations?

The charts furnished to elucidate the Naval Manœuvres are those in actual use by the officers conducting the manœuvres, and would, therefore, seem the most suitable for hon. Members to follow. Any charts which are published by the Admiralty, and which the hon. and gallant Member wishes to see, can doubtless be shown to him on his signifying his wish to the Librarian of the House. As the scope of the operations extends over the whole of the coasts of the United Kingdom it is difficult to define any limits. I have not seen the chart at Lloyd's referred to; but I would remind the hon. and gallant Member that, although Lloyd's may record from hour to hour the movements of the ships from the sources at their disposal, this is not done from authoritative sources; and even if it were possible to do so, I do not consider such movements would be of value to hon. Members when the conditions are so constantly changing. I have no objection to having a Paper drawn up showing the composition of the different Squadrons, which may be attached to the charts.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Local Government Board, Ireland, will take any steps to compel the Board of Guardians of the Mullingar Union to avail themselves of the power to take water from Lough Owel, given in the Mullingar Water Act of 1885; and, if the Guardians allow the compulsory powers given by that Act, and limited to three years from the passing of it to expire, does the whole Act drop?

The Local Government Board have no power to compel the Board of Guardians of Mullingar Union to carry out the Lough Owel scheme provided for by the Mullingar Water Act of 1885. The powers of the Guardians for the compulsory purchase of land or waters for the purposes of the Act will expire on the 31st instant; and the period within which the works authorized by the Act may be executed will terminate on July 31, 1892.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieu- tenant of Ireland, Whether the metting in Boyle, described in the warrant on which Mr. James O'Kelly, M.P., was arrested, was advertised for a considerable time previous to being held; whether any steps were taken to proclaim it; and, what time has elapsed since the alleged offence was committed?

The meeting referred to was held on Sunday, June 24. It was summoned by placards; but for what time previous to the date fixed I am unable to say. No steps were taken to proclaim it.

With reference to the arrest of Mr. O'Kelly, may I ask whether the Irish Government had any reason to apprehend that he or any other Irish Member would endeavour to avoid arrest, or would fail to appear in Court to answer any charge against him; and whether they cannot convey to a Member that his presence is required on a certain day, instead of having detectives slouching about the House, and dogging the steps of Members on their way to and from the discharge of their Parliamentary duties?

There is no legal process by which, under the Act, a Member can be summoned in England to attend in Ireland. My hon. and learned Friend (the Solicitor General for Ireland) tells me that it must be done by way of warrant. With regard to the other Question of the hon. Member, whether I have any reason to suppose that any Irish Member of Parliament would desire to evade going before a Court of Law, I have to say that I have painful experience on that point, for two or three Gentlemen at least refused to obey summonses.

asked why the warrant was held over, and why the proceedings were delayed for a month?

I have no reason to believe that the warrant was held over for any period of time. As to the Question why the hon. Member for Roscommon was not arrested immediately after the speech or meeting, the hon. Member must be aware that these things require consideration, and delay must occur.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say by whom was the prosecution directed—whether he himself directed the prosecution?

I am entirely responsible for what has taken place.

asked if it was not the case that English jurisdiction "runs" in Scotland and vice versâ?

, after consultation with the Lord Advocate, said, he was not prepared to admit that such was the case; but he was absolutely certain such jurisdiction did not apply to a summons of an Irish Court of Summary Jurisdiction.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman say why a summons was not served on the hon. Member for Roscommon?

It would be impossible to obtain a summons for service in England, and the only process that could be obtained for execution in England was a warrant enforceable under the Statute.

Is there no other way of informing a Member engaged in attending to his Parliamentary duties that he is required to answer a complaint against him than that of arresting him and taking him as a prisoner to Ireland?

There are no other means known to the law of effecting the object.

asked, if the sending of an Irish Court summons to a person resident in England would not be as effectual as if the party was in Ireland?

No; there is no statutory provision for serving it; no magistrate would be justified in issuing such a document, and it could not possibly be put in force.

I would like to ask whether midnight was selected for effecting the arrest of the hon. Member for Roscommon, because the authorities were afraid his arrest in the streets in the course of the day might have caused a tumult?

Order, order! Sir John Swinburne.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Her Majesty's Government will employ any armed Natives of Africa in suppressing the unhappy disturbances which have arisen in Zululand?

(who replied) said: Basutos and friendly Zulus have already been employed, and the General in command has full discretion to employ them in the suppression of these disturbances. It is desirable, as far as possible, to relieve the white troops from the danger to health inseparable from the climate in Zululand.

asked, whether horrible atrocities did not take place in the Transvaal, including the brutal murder of women and children, through the employment of Native levies?

said, there was no use in going back to that time. The General in command would now be responsible for the conduct of the levies.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he would endeavour to make arrangements whereby the Speaker should attend the Commission for giving the Royal Assent to Bills at a time more convenient to the Lower House?

I am in communication with the authorities of the other House, with the view of seeing whether arrangements cannot be made for the Royal Assent being signified at an earlier stage of the proceedings of this House.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Cabinet will, before arriving at any conclusion on the First Commissioner reporting to them on the subject of Richmond Park, take into consideration the larger question whether, having regard to the growing national importance of the Volunteer Army, one or more Central or Provincial Camps of Instruction and Competition should be provided for them in touch with the Regular Forces, and on a basis commensurate with their value to the country?

The question as to g allowing to the Volunteers the use of Richmond Park is still under the consideration of the Government, and the more general question of camps of instruction will also receive attention.