asked the Lord Advocate, Whether it is the case that crofters in the Island of Lewis, though assessed for the upholding of roads and bridges in the Island, have no voice in the management of the Road Trust, which is composed of the proprietrix's factor and a few nominated large farmers; whether it is the case that no meetings are held of the Trustees; that no accounts of the Trust are ever printed or published; that crofters in several districts, though assessed, have no public roads to their townships; whether it is the case that William Gillanders, in the employment of Lady Matheson, the proprietrix, is the collector and treasurer to the Trustees at a yearly salary of £40; and, will the Government include the management of the roads in the Island of Lewis in the proposed Local Government Bill for Scotland?

I have received to-day the following telegram from Stornoway:—

"The Lewis Road Trustees are annually elected in terms of Section 80 of the Ross and Cromarty Road Act, 1866, which limits the qualification to tenants rented at no less than £50 per annum, four Trustees are annually appointed by the Parochial Boards of Lewis, and four nominated by the proprietor, the proprietor and factor being Trustees ex officio in terms of the Act. Meetings are held, when necessary, in addition to the annual statutory meeting, and the accounts are audited and open to inspection; but to save expense, and as the Act does not require it, they are not printed. All lands and heritages in the Valuation Roll are assessed in terms of the Act. Several townships have no road to them. The Trustees have no power under the Act to construct new roads or bridges. William Gillanders, accountant in Lady Matheson's employment, is clerk, collector, and treasurer to the Lewis Road Trustees, the salary attached to these combined offices being £30, and not £40 as stated. The roads within burghs are managed by the Police Commissioners alone. Remarks only apply to landward district."

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the gentleman appointed this year by the Commissioners of Intermediate Education to select Examination Halls for the Belfast centres, and to receive and distribute the signature rolls and boxes containing the examination packets and stationery to the Centre Superintendents of Belfast and the North of Ireland, had thereby, unavoidably, an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the centre numbers, the names of the students attending the centres, and the schools or Colleges at which such students studied; whether the gentleman referred to acted also as General Superintendent at Belfast, visiting from time to time the different centres in that town, and also acted as one of the examiners in English of the junior and senior grade, and was able to identify a student as belonging to a particular school or College in Belfast, or the North of Ireland, by means of the centre number written on the back of each student's envelope enclosing the answer books; and, whether he will consider of devising a system by which the name of the student and the place of education will be unknown to the examiner?

(who replied) said: The Assistant Education Commissioners inform me that under the system of the Intermediate Education Board the students examined are known to the examiners by their examination numbers only. It is true that one of the examiners in the present year also acted as supervisor generally of the conduct of the examinations in Belfast. In the latter capacity the gentleman in question received from the office and distributed certain signature rolls which contained the numbers and names of students, but not their school or College addresses; and there is no reason to suppose that he made use of his position for the purpose of identifying any of the candidates whose papers he subsequently examined.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, If the injury which will be caused to British authors and publishers, no less than to paper makers, compositors, and kindred industries of the United Kingdom, by the proposed enactment in the United States of the legislative provision that American copyright shall only be given to works composed by American labour upon American paper, has been under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government; and what action has been taken in the matter?

My attention has been drawn to these provisions of the proposed legislation on the subject of copyright in the United States. I think the provisions generally are favourable to English authors; but no doubt there is a portion of the Bill which may be injurious to English publishers and the printing trade in England. I inquired into the subject, and ascertained that so much importance was attached to these provisions in the United States that it was not at all likely that any representation from Her Majesty's Government in favour of their withdrawal would be entertained. I shall, therefore, not be able to move the Foreign Office to make any such representations. I think, however, that the matter may be further considered with advantage when we deal with copyright legislation in this country.

supposed the right hon. Gentleman would not undertake the responsibility of impeding legislation which conferred benefits on British authors?

said, his impression was distinctly that the proposed legislation would be beneficial to English authors; and he should be sorry, on their account, to lose the legislation, in spite of the provisions to which his hon. Friend (Mr. Howard Vincent) referred.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he can now state the intention of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the excessive dues at present levied on British shipping for the maintenance of hospitals at Constantinople and Smyrna?

I regret that I am not in a position to state the intention of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the excessive dues at present levied on British shipping for the maintenance of hospitals at Constantinople and Smyrna. The matter is still under the consideration of the Departments concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether his attention has been called to the case of three young men from Branish, in the Island of Lewis, named respectively Donald Macritchie, aged 19, Donald Mackinnon, aged 17, and Malcolm Buchanan, aged 20, who, having enlisted in Stornoway while under the influence of drink on July 3, were arrested as deserters on July 18, and compelled by the local police to walk to Stornoway, without food or refreshment of any sort, for a distance of 44 miles, and have been in prison ever since; why was the bail that has been offered for their liberation not accepted; if he can explain why Mackinnon, who is under age, has been imprisoned as a deserter, when he ought not to have been enlisted without some proof of his being the full age; and, whether, if a certified copy of his birth register is produced, he will be set at liberty?

, in reply, said, his attention was first drawn to the matter by the hon. Member's Question, and a full Report had been called for.

asked the Lord Advocate, If it is a fact that in the Island of Lewis the schoolhouse of Cromore is eight miles from a public road, that of Planasker or Macraig nine miles, those of Keosharder, Graver, and Lenmera respectively four miles; whether the average attendance at those schools ranges from 45 to 55 children, and whether each family in the district are bound to pay 10s. per annum for road money; and, whether, considering the poverty of the people and the facility with which cheap labour can be got in this district, the Government will act on the recommendations in Mr. Machoil's Report, and bring pressure to bear on the Road Trustees to have roads made in this district, or give a grant-in-aid to carry out this necessary improvement, and at the same time prevent a number of families from dying of slow starvation for want of adequate food?

The facts in the first two paragraphs are not quite correct—Cromore schoolhouse being distant seven and not eight miles, and that of Planaskar or Macraig being eight and not nine miles distant from a public road. The average attendance ranges from 36 to 57, and not 45 to 55 as stated. The Government have no power to bring pressure upon the Road Trustees in order to compel or induce them to make roads in any district. The question of a grant-in-aid for local public purposes is a very large one, and is one of general public policy. I would point out to the hon. Member that even were such grant given the relief would only be of a temporary nature, as has already been proved by the former employment of the inhabitants for the formation of roads by the proprietor of the Island.

asked the Lord Advocate, If, on May 10 last, a fisherman of the name of Robert Hogg, belonging to the village of Saltburn, near Invergordon, had his fishing-gear and coble confiscated by the water-bailiffs of the district while fishing in the bay near his residence, without any explanation being given as to the reason for the confiscation; by what right, or under what statute, such confiscation has been made; whether he is aware that the said Hogg has fished in the Cromarty Firth for the last 20 years, in the locality in which he has now been interfered with, with a similar boat and nets, without once being interfered with; whether the water-bailiffs have a right to hold Hogg's property, as they still do, for an unlimited period; and, if he is guilty of a criminal offence, why he is not prosecuted for the same, instead of being deprived of his means of making a living for an indefinite length of time?

Last year Hogg was suspected of illegally taking salmon, and was cautioned. He was again cautioned in February last. On the occasion in question, he was seen illegally fishing during the night for about three hours, aided by three other persons, and in his boat 38 fish were found. The net was of a mesh forbidden bye-law, and was made like a salmon-fishing net. The seizure was made under Sections 26 and 27 of the Act of 1862, and Section 15 of the Act of 1868. I am not aware that Hogg had fished for salmon for 20 years with such nets and boats; but if he did so he committed an offence against the law. As already stated, he was twice warned before this seizure. The delay in instituting legal proceedings has been, in my opinion, most improper; but for this the criminal authorities are not responsible, as these cases are not reported to, or conducted by, the Crown Prosecutor. I have, however, called attention to the impropriety of a prosecution being so long delayed, particularly where articles have been seized; but I must add that it is incorrect to say that Hogg is deprived of his means of living. He has since the seizure been pursuing his proper avocation as a deep sea fisher, for which the boat and net seized were quite unsuitable.

asked the Postmaster General, If any progress is being made in the negotiations with the Highland Railway as to the carriage of mails in the North, and at what stage they have now arrived; if it is a fact that a letter, posted at 3 p.m. in Invergordon for Dingwall, 12 miles distant, with several trains passing to and from each place daily, does not arrive at the latter place till 11 a.m. next day; is it the case that letters posted North of Invergordon are carried past there to Inverness, and are returned thence from Inverness and delivered next day about 2 p.m.; if all letters from Golspie to Inverness, 66 miles, are carried on to Inverness, sorted there, and returned Northwards again, causing a delay of about a day in the delivery of letters in the intervening districts; is it a fact that the Highland Railway Company demand £5,000 per annum more for the postal work than they used to get; if the matter has been referred to arbitration; and, at what time negotiations were entered into to have the matter settled before June 30, when the contract expired?

It is understood to be the intention of the Highland Railway Company to refer to arbitration the question of the remuneration for the conveyance of the mails on the Highland Railway. The facts as regards Invergordon are stated by the hon. Member with substantial accuracy. Some portion of the correspondence from the North, however, is delivered, not the next day, but the same day. Letters from Golspie to Inverness are certainly carried on to Inverness; but this is an arrangement which I presume must be satisfactory to all concerned. If the hon. Member, however, refers to letters from Golspie to places between Golspie and Inverness—such as Dornoch, Tain, Dingwall, and so on—I have to state that they are sent in direct bags, and delivered the same day. It is a fact that the Highland Railway Company demand for a renewal of the contract £5,000 a-year, in addition to the high payment previously received. I have considered it my duty to resist this demand, and leave the Company to their remedy. Various communications respecting the renewal of the contract passed between the Railway Company and the Post Office prior to June 30, the earliest being in February last. The arbitration will probably take place in October next.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he is aware that the Secretary of the Board of Works gave permission to the Roman Catholic Dean of Cashel to hold religious services in the Ruin on the Rock of Cashel on July 15 last; whether he is aware that such permission is in express contravention to the 25th section of the Irish Church Act; and, whether he will take steps that no such violation of the law shall again occur?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has asked me to answer this Question. The Board received an application from the Rev. Mr. Kinane for permission for a procession of Temperance and other Societies to visit the Rock of Cashel on July 15, and stating it was their intention to wind up with some prayers. He was informed, in reply, to the following effect—

"That the provisions of the Irish Church Act strictly prohibited any structure vested in this Board for preservation as a national monument being used as a place of public worship; but as the Board understood that the proposed procession did not, strictly speaking, come within the prohibition above referred to, they would not raise any objection to its taking place."

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to the great success attending the working of the First Offenders Act in New Zealand, and to the fact that it saved the Colony in prison expenses last year no less a sum than £3,226 5s. 9d., and to the large number of first offenders brought back to honest livelihood under its operation without being subjected to the contamination of prison influence; and, if he can give any particulars as to the operation in the United Kingdom of "The Probation of First Offenders Act, 1887."

Yes, Sir; I have seen the Report of the Inspector of Prisons in New Zealand showing that this Act has been successfully carried out there. I have no official information as to its operation in this country; but I will take steps to ascertain, as far as possible, to what extent the Act has been put in force, and with what result.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether, after serving for five years or thereabouts in the Scots Guards, J. W. Eveson was by consent transferred, about three or four months ago, to the Army Reserve, and received £15 of deferred pay; whether, on being offered private employment on condition of purchasing his discharge, he was informed by the War Office that the cost would be £18; whether, on subsequently forwarding his papers, he was then for the first time made aware that he must refund his deferred pay in addition; and, whether this was demanded in virtue of a Royal Warrant; and, if so, what was its date?

The proceedings in connection with the discharge of J. W. Eveson, of the Scots Guards, were entirely in accordance with Article 609 of the Current Pay and Promotion Warrant, which is a reproduction of similar Articles in force since 1881. If repayment of the deferred pay were not insisted upon in such cases any soldier could purchase his discharge from the Army Reserve with his deferred pay, and thus avoid all Reserve service.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether it is correct, as stated in the Press, that the contract for the engines of H.M.S. Blake has been given out; whether the engines are to be built to a Government specification; and, whether the makers of the engines, building to a Government specification, take upon themselves absolute responsibility in regard to their efficiency in every particular?

(who replied) said: The information given by the Press as to the contract for the engines of Her Majesty's ship Blake, to which the hon. Gentleman alludes, is correct.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that Sub-Commissioners Butler and Gregory, in May last, while engaged in valuing the farm of Timothy M'Carthy, a tenant of Lord Muskerry, partook of luncheon provided by the landlord; if it is contrary to any Rule or recommendations of the Land Commission that Sub-Commissioners should accept hospitality from a landlord while performing official duty; and, considering the decisions of the Limerick Sub-Commission have given such dissatisfaction that a public meeting was recently held in Newcastle West with reference to the insufficiency of the reductions given to tenants by this Sub-Commission, he will direct Messrs. Butler and Gregory to refrain from a practice which may have the effect of lessening public confidence in their impartiality?

(who replied) said, the Land Commissioners informed him that they had asked the Assistant Commissioners for a statement with regard to the alleged occurrence.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the Treasury Minute of June 1, 1882, relative to the superannuation of writers, is applicable to writers transferred to the establishment of the Civil Service since the date of the Minute in question?

This Minute applies only to copyists whose original employment commenced before August 19, 1871, and continued without interruption until their transfer to the establishment. It does not apply to copyists whose continuous employment commenced at any later date.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether his attention has been called to a statement by Colonel Onslow, reported in The Times of June 7, to the effect that "The Infantry soldier did not have enough meals;" whether his attention had been called to a statement by Lord Wolseley, reported in the same issue, as follows:—

"That our men did not get enough to eat went without showing, because there was not a regiment in which the men did not, in a large measure, supplement the rations given them. It would be, he was sure, a wise thing if the rations of the soldiers were increased;"

As I stated a few days ago, I have decided to appoint a strong Committee to consider fully the subject of soldiers' rations; but I do not think that it would be a proper subject to refer to the Royal Commission which is now sitting.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he will cause inquiries to be made as to the expediency of making arrangements with Captain Shaw (Chief of the Fire Brigade) to provide for a continuous attendance of men with fire escapes, so as to avoid, as much as possible, the lamentable and fatal results which occurred at the Edgware Road and Wigmore Street fires?

I have communicated with the Chief of the Fire Brigade on this matter; and he informs me that, with the present number of firemen in the Brigade, it would not be possible to provide a continuous attendance of men with fire escapes; but the suggestion of my hon. Friend is a valuable one, and will, no doubt, engage the attention of the new authority in which the control of the Brigade will shortly be vested.

asked, whether, in the right hon. Gentleman's opinion, this great city should be left exposed to a risk of loss of life, which they now knew was not speculative, from recent calamities between now and the appointment of the new authorities?

said, he would be extremely happy to supply any remedy for the undoubted shortcomings as compared with the needs of the Metropolis, but he had no means to do so without legislation.

said, that £5,000 would cover the whole of the expense necessary.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether the terms of the contract for the conveyance of the mails between Canada and Hong Kong have been finally agreed upon between Her Majesty's Government and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company; and, if so, when he proposes to lay the contract before the House?

Yes, Sir; the terms are practically agreed upon; but the contract cannot be signed in time to be presented to Parliament before the Autumn Session.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a Memorial has been received from the ex-King of Wassar, now detained a prisoner at Lagos; and, whether he will cause inquiries to be made into the allegations in such Memorial?

That Memorial has been received. The Secretary of State is inclined to think that if there is a general desire among the people of Wassar for the ex-King's return, and if it would not be likely to lead to disturbances or civil war, it might be allowed, provided that adequate security were taken for his good behaviour; but further inquiry shall be made.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any information has been received from the Governor of Lagos, or any of the authorities on the coast, as to the number of Natives killed within the last 12 months by persons in the employ of the Royal Niger Company?

We have not heard of any persons so killed, except in an unfortunate collision between the leader of an expedition into the interior and some of the men attached to him, which is at present the subject of inquiry.

asked the Vice Chamberlain, If he will inform the House what steps, if any, the Government propose to take with reference to the important recommendations contained in the Report of the Departmental Committee on Pleuro-pneumonia and Tuberculosis in the United Kingdom recently presented to Parliament; whether anything is to be done with regard to compulsory slaughter and payment of compensation out of National Funds in case of pleuro-pneumonia, as recommended by the Committee; and, whether, in view of the grave disclosures in the Report as to the existing danger to public health by the spread of tuberculosis, it is the intention of the Government to deal with the recommendations of the Committee as to the exposure, sale, and disposal of diseased animals and carcases?

The recommendations of the Committee on Pleuro-pneumonia and Tuberculosis have been carefully considered by the Lords of the Council, and an Order of Council is now being drafted for their consideration, which embraces such parts of the recommendations of the Committee as can be effected without fresh legislation. The payment of compensation for pleuro-pneumonia out of the Public Funds can only be sanctioned by Parliament; but the recommendations with regard to tuberculosis can be generally carried out by the Privy Council under their existing powers.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether, in settling the basis for the appropriation of the Probate Duty grant between the several counties and county boroughs constituted by the Local Government Bill, he will in the case of those county boroughs which have not hitherto claimed any particular grant—such, for instance, as the grant-in-aid of the salaries of Medical Officers of Health and Sanitary Inspector, or the grant-in-aid of main roads—add to the actual amount of the grants paid to the several localities the amounts to which they would have been entitled in respect of the unclaimed grants if application had been made for them?

The Local Government Bill does not confer on the Local Government Board any power to proceed as suggested in the distribution of the Probate Duty grant. It is, of course, too late to make any alteration in the Bill in this respect; and, if it were not, I think it would not be practicable, in determining what grants were payable for certain purposes in the different counties and districts in the last financial year, to take into consideration what sums might have been payable during that year under the existing system of grants if circumstances had been different from what they actually were.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether there is any truth in the statement that has recently been published in the newspapers to the effect that Sir Lionel West has sent a Note to Mr. Bayard, the American Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, stating that a respite was desired by the British Government for Hugh Brooks, otherwise Maxwell, who was convicted of the murder of Arthur Preller at St. Louis, in the State of Missouri; and, whether it is usual for instructions to be given to British Ministers accredited to Foreign Powers to make similar representations in such cases; and, whether, if not, he will state what are the precise special circumstances in the case of the barbarous murder of Arthur Preller which have been considered a sufficient ground for taking a course of an unusual character?

In consequence of the urgent appeals received from Hugh Brooks' father and from his attorneys at St. Louis, Sir Lionel West was instructed to ask of the United States Secretary of State or the Governor of Missouri, as he might deem best, a respite for further inquiry; but this was to be done only if, in Sir Lionel West's judgment, there was any ground for believing that injustice was being done in the case. He replied that an application for respite had been forwarded to the Governor by Mr. Bayard. We do not know whether that application was made upon Sir Lionel West's representations, or, if so, on what ground Sir Lionel West acted. It is usual for Foreign Representatives to solicit consideration by the Governments to which they are accredited of cases for inquiry into the justice of judicial sentences where primâ facie grounds are apparent.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Who appointed the Clerk of Works to the additional building, Killarney District Lunatic Asylum, and if the appointment has been sanctioned by the Board of Works, or by the Lord Lieutenant; whether the person appointed is already acting in the capacity of Engineer to that Institution; what training has he received to qualify him for either of those positions, and on whose recommendation have the appointments been made; and, whether these two appointments can be held by the same person?

said, this Question had appeared on the previous day on the Notice Paper, and he understood that it had been answered by the Secretary to the Treasury, for the answer appeared in The Times.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he had any recollection of having answered the Question; and, if not, how it was that the Question appeared as answered in the London Times?

I had a written answer to the Question referred to with me yesterday. It was with other answers to Questions which I had brought down to the House. I cannot remember at this moment whether the Question was put to me or not. If it was not put, I can only suppose that the answer was sent to the Press with the other answers which I had with me, and which were all attached together.

asked, what special claim The Times had to copies of Ministerial answers relating to local Irish Questions?

The Times has no special claim. The answers are sent up to the Gallery, and dealt with by the reporters.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether it is in contemplation to reduce the charge on letters to India and the East from 5d. per letter to 2½d., the latter amount being charged from France, Germany, and other Continental countries to English Possessions in India, &c.; and, whether it is his intention to give English and Indian correspondents the benefit of the £100,000 saved on the Indian Mail Contract this year?

I am very glad to see my hon. Friend back to his Parliamentary duties, although he has signalized his re-appearance by giving Notice of a fire of Questions. In answer to this Question, I have to say that it is not in contemplation to reduce the postage on letters to India and the East in the manner suggested in the first part of the hon. Member's Question. The saving referred to in the second part of the Question is not a profit, but merely a reduction in the amount of a heavy loss. I may refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on the 14th of February last to a similar Question asked by the hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. J. M. Maclean).

asked the Postmaster General, Whether the contract for the conveyance of mails to and from Australia has been signed; under what terms are the mails being conveyed now, and what payments are being made to the Steamship Companies; when will the contract be submitted to Parliament for approval; is the proposed contract entirely distinct from the Indian contract; and, have the Australian Governments remonstrated against the days fixed for the departure of the mails from Australia, and with what result?

Contracts for the conveyance of mails to and from Australia by the Peninsular and Oriental and Orient Steam Navigation Companies have been signed; and these are entirely separate and distinct instruments from that which regulates the India and China Service. The Australian Governments are not at present entirely satisfied with the arrangements made for the departure of the mails from Australia; and it is because there are the weightiest reasons against making the alteration demanded in those arrangements that the instruments referred to have not yet been laid before the House of Commons. It would be premature to submit to the House contracts embodying an arrangement which the Colonial Governments may, after all, wish to repudiate; but as soon as I am assured that the hesitation of those Governments as regards the carrying out of the arrangements has been overcome, the contracts can at once be submitted to the House. Meanwhile, the mails are being provisionally carried under the terms of the contracts; and payments on account are being made to the Companies without prejudice to the provisions of the contract relating to the ultimate approval of the House of Commons.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If any steps have been taken to obtain from the French Government compensation for the arrest of two gentlemen—namely, Mr. Underwood and Mr. Blight, on June 11 last, in Dunkirk?

A full inquiry into the circumstances of the arrest of Messrs. Underwood and Blight has been made by the French Government; and the explanations given are considered by Her Majesty's Government to be satisfactory. The French military commandant at Dunkirk, with whom the responsibility rested, and who acted from an excess of zeal, has been reprimanded. There is no question, therefore, of demanding compensation.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Lieutenant Wissmann, who has lately been received by the King of the Belgians and the Emperor of Germany, is about to accompany an Expedition for the relief of Emin Pasha; and, if so, what is the nature of that Expedition?

Her Majesty's Government have no knowledge of any such Expedition as that referred to.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he has considered the Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons which was appointed in 1876 to inquire into the Metropolitan Fire Brigade; and, whether he intends to take any steps to carry out the recommendation of that Report, that the Fire Brigade should be incorporated with the Metropolitan Police?

asked, whether the suggestion so made had not been deliberately rejected by every Government that had been in power since?

I cannot answer the second Question without Notice. Certainly, it has not been acted upon so much as I know. I am aware of the Report referred to by my hon. Friend; but, as I stated yesterday, the question of a re-organization of the Fire Brigade is one that can hardly be dealt with by the Government at the present time, when the Brigade is about to be handed over to the London County Council.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If there is any truth in the statement going the round of the newspapers that arrangements are in progress for an extension of the British Empire in the shape of a Protectorate over North Borneo and other countries of the Indian Archipelago?

I have already stated that the question of a British Protectorate over parts of North Borneo is the subject of negotiations not yet completed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been directed to a recent Report, addressed to the Governor of the State of New York, as to the best mode of conducting the execution of criminals in that state; and, whether he is prepared to recommend the adoption of either of the methods recommended in that Report—namely, execution by electricity, or by the injection of morphia, or by the lethal chamber invented for the painless killing of the lower animals by Dr. B. W. Richardson, or of any other system of executing criminals more in accordance with the humane feelings of the present day than the barbarous and unscientific method now practised in this country?

No, Sir; my attention has not been called to this Report; but I have seen a copy of an Act recently passed in the State of New York providing for the infliction of the death penalty by electricity. The Government are not prepared to introduce legislation with the view of altering the method of carrying out executions. I will, however, undertake to give careful consideration to the suggestions of my hon. Friend.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether it is a fact that though the men employed in the different grades in the Dublin Post Office are supposed to be on the same footing in the Service as men in corresponding grades in London depôts, yet the London officials when employed on Sundays in the Parcel Post delivery receive double the rate at which the Dublin officials are paid; and, if so, what is the reason of the distinction made between the two classes of officials, and whether it will be abolished?

No, Sir; it is not a fact.

Is it not a fact that the London men receive 1s. 6d. per hour, and the Dublin men only 9d.?

If the hon. Gentleman will put his Question in writing, I will make further inquiry.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether he has yet given any reply to the Memorial from the letter sorters employed in the Holyhead and Kingstown Packet Post Office, in which they have asked to be put on an equality with all other travelling sorters, by being granted the usual extra pay for Sunday work, and to have, as regards their pay generally, account taken of the exceptional character of the service in which they are engaged; and, if an answer has been given, whether he would state its substance; and, if not, what is the reason of the delay?

No, Sir; an answer has not yet been given. The Question, though apparently simple, involves the consideration of other allowances which the Holyhead and Kingstown sorters receive. However, I am not without hopes that a decision may now be given shortly.

Will it be another 12 months?

I hope not.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether his attention has been called to the statements made with reference to Mr. Furnivall on page ix. of the Report from the Select Committee on East India (Hyderabad (Deccan) Mining Company), to the effect that Mr. Furnivall, who was recently in the employ of the Government of India, but has now retired on a pension, received from Mr. W. C. Watson 500 shares in the Hyderabad (Deccan) Company, "for nothing;" that he sold these shares at £11 each, and therefore realized £5,500 for them; whether Mr. Furnivall will be required to refund such sum of £5,000 to the shareholders of the Hyderabad (Deccan) Company; and, whether, in the event of his refusing to refund such moneys, the Indian Government will take steps to secure the amount being repaid to these shareholders out of the pension payable to Mr. Furnivall?

(who replied) said: The attention of the Secretary of State has been called to the statements respecting Mr. Furnivall in the Report of the Select Committee on the Hyderabad (Deccan) Mining Company. As, however, Mr. Furnivall had retired from the service of the Government of India before the transactions in question took place, it is not within the competence of the Secretary of State to take any action in the matter.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether his attention has been called to the statements made with reference to Mr. Hughes, on page ix. of the Report from the Select Committee on East India (Hyderabad (Deccan) Mining Company), to the effect that Mr. Hughes, a Government official in India, one of the Superintendents of the Survey, was nevertheless allowed by that Government to be employed and paid by the Hyderabad (Deccan) Company to ascertain the value of the concession obtained from the Nizam, that he received from Mr. W. C. Watson, the promoter and director of the Company, shares of the value of £3,200, only paying £1,000 for them, and that this transaction amounted, according to the statement of Mr. Watson, to a gift by him to Mr. Hughes, who, in return, was to "work and throw his whole energies into it;" whether Mr. Hughes will be required to refund this sum of £2,200 to the shareholders of the Hyderabad (Deccan) Company; whether it is proposed to take, and, if so, what, steps with reference to Mr. Hughes in respect of his transactions with Mr. Watson; whether, whilst employed and paid by Mr. Watson, Mr. Hughes received any official salary as Superintendent of the Survey; and, if so, at what rate per month; and, whether the Indian Government will take the necessary steps so as to prevent for the future their officials from acting for and receiving payment from speculators in that Empire?

(who replied) said: The Secretary of State has noticed the statements, to which the attention of the Government of India will at once be called. Mr. Hughes's services were lent to the Deccan Company, they arranging for his remuneration. During his employment under the Company no salary was paid to him from the Indian Treasury.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether he is aware that on September 14, 1886, the Secretary to the Board of Trade, in answer to a Question, said—

"The Board of Trade fully recognize the necessity for legislation in connection with the Law of Copyright. … and that they will not fail to give the matter their best consideration during the Recess;"

The quotation may be correct; and the result of the consideration has been that my Predecessors did not feel able to propose legislation on this subject, while, in my own time, the Government have been too much occupied with other matters. I will look into the question during the Recess.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether his attention has been called to the statements in the Native Press of India, which are borne out by the Reports of the Chief Commissioner and Sanitary Commissioner of Assam, that the abuses to which the coolies are subjected, in many instances, amount to conditions of slavery, and are certainly such as to demand immediate attention; and, whether he will give directions to the Executive Authorities in India to take steps at once to mitigate the serious hardships inflicted on these labourers, pending the enactment of such alterations in the Inland Emigration Act of 1882 as are evidently required?

(who replied) said: The Secretary of State has noticed statements of the kind referred to; but he cannot admit their accuracy. As stated to the House on August 6, the Secretary of State requested the Government of India in November, 1886, to watch narrowly the working of the Emigration Act of 1882. He does not consider it necessary to issue further instructions to the Government of India, as he is satisfied that the Government of India is alive to the importance of the subject, and has now under consideration the Memorial of the Indian Association.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether it is a fact that members of the Police Force (other than lodger voters), whilst enjoying the Parliamentary franchise, are nevertheless debarred from voting for the election of County Councillors?

The matter is not one altogether free from doubt; but the conclusion at which I have arrived, from the advice which I have received on the subject, is that members of the Police Force will not be debarred from voting at the election of County Councillors.

asked the Secretary to the Trea- sury, Whether there is any objection to giving the marks obtained by candidates at the recent Sandhurst examination in each of the two mathematical papers set at that examination instead of the marks obtained in the two combined; and, whether, for the future, the Rule will be laid down that the marks obtained by each candidate in each several paper set by the examiners under the Civil Service Commission will be given separately?

The right hon. Gentleman will see that his Question implies doubt as to the fairness or capacity of the officers of the Civil Service Commission; and he appears to desire that material should be afforded to this House to enable it to review the course and the results of the examinations undertaken by the Commissioners. It would, in the judgment of the Government, be quite impossible to sanction such a proceeding. The decisions of the Commissioners are final by the authority of the Acts of Parliament and Orders in Council under which they are constituted. The Government have no right of interference; and, in their judgment, it would be impossible for any other authority to intervene without extreme peril to the highest public interests.

said, he had no desire whatever to review the work of the Civil Service Commissioners. All he asked was whether it would not be possible for the examiners to give the exact number of marks obtained by each candidate?

We have not thought it reasonable in the circumstances.

Every other body of examiners does so.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, though the Land Commissioners have at last announced that a Sub-Commission will sit again in Dublin County in September, several Dublin cases, in which the originating notices were served 12 months ago, are not listed for hearing on that occasion; whether he is aware that the landlords in some of those cases are attempting, by threat of legal proceedings, to exact the old rents without abatement; and, whether, under these circumstances, the Government will be prepared to suggest to the Land Commission the advisability of adding to the number of the Land Courts in Dublin County, or otherwise hastening the disposal of the arrears of business referred to, the delay in dealing with which has already occasioned so much hardship?

(who replied) said: The Land Commissioners state that the list of cases for the next sitting of a Sub-Commission in the County Dublin has not yet been published. It will include all cases received at their office up to and including September 28 last. The Commissioners intend to avail themselves of the services of the new Assistant Commissioners in those districts where the claims appear to them to be most pressing.

inquired, if the hon. and learned Gentleman had found it was a fact, as he (Mr. Clancy) stated, that notices served a year ago were precluded, would he adopt the suggestion contained in the last paragraph of the Question?

said, a revision of the Sub-Commissioners rested with the Land Commission.

asked the Postmaster General, Whether he has yet come to any decision relative to a site for a new post office in the town of Carlow, the existing post office in which place has been described by the Town Commissioners, and by the Post Office Inspector, as totally unsuited to the requirements of the locality?

Advertisement has recently been made for the site of the premises to be purchased or retained by the Department for a post office at Carlow, and when all the offers have been received, no time will be lost in arriving at a decision.

I must ask the right hon. Gentleman how it happens that matters relating to post offices in Ireland are always delayed an unnecessarily long time?

Delay has occurred owing to the difficulty of obtaining premises. I hope, now that the premises have been got, no further delay will occur.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Why, and when, Sir Frederick Abel ceased to be chemist to the War Department, and if he is in receipt of any pension; whether, before taking out the patent for a smokeless explosive in November, 1886, he first obtained the sanction of the Secretary of State, in accordance with the Rule requiring him to do so; and, in regard to Sir Frederick Abel's statement that he took out the patent for the purpose of reserving to the War Department the right of making and using it, whether the right of making use of any invention is reserved to the Crown under Section 27 of "The Patents, Designs, and Trades Marks Act, 1883," and provision made by section 44 of the same Act for enabling an inventor to put the War Department in possession of any improvement in munitions of war which he may discover, so that the Secretary of State may himself take out a patent for such improvement without any particulars relating to it coming to the knowledge of a Foreign Power; and, whether the patent taken out for the manufacture of a smokeless explosive by Sir Frederick Abel, when he was chemist to the War Department, is now vested in the Secretary of State?

Sir Frederick Abel ceased to be chemist to the War Department on July 10, when he was appointed President of the Committee on Explosives. He is still in receipt of effective pay. Sir Frederick Abel's invention of a smokeless explosive was patented by him for the purpose of securing to the War Department priority of invention and the right of making and using it; and he did not think it necessary, under the circumstances, to obtain permission for so doing. The right of making use of any invention is reserved to the Crown under Section 27 of the Patents Act, subject to terms agreed upon before or after use with the approval of the Treasury. It is not customary for patents to stand in the name of the Secretary of State, except in special cases of secrecy; but Sir Frederick Abel is perfectly ready to transfer his patent to the War Office.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he would make inquiries as to the truth of the statement that the mills of Messrs. Robinson, Currie, & Co., in Aberdeen (whose workers are at present on strike) have been for the last few years run 15 minutes per day more than the legal time; and, if he will order the practice to be stopped?

, in reply, said, he had instructed the Chief Inspector of Factories to make immediate inquiry into the truth of the statement.

asked the hon. Member for the Knutsford Division of Cheshire, Whether the Metropolitan Board of Works have caused inquiries to be made as to the flooding of houses in the Chalk Farm District of St. Pancras; whether representations have been made by the Vestry to this effect; whether a grave nuisance and danger to the health of the neighbourhood have been caused thereby; and, what steps are to be taken to remedy the defective drainage to which it is due?

(who replied) said: Representations have been made to the Metropolitan Board by the Vestry of St. Pancras as to the flooding of houses in the Chalk Farm District. No doubt those floodings are a great nuisance to the inhabitants of the neighbourhood. It is certain, however, that the flooding is not due to the insufficiency of the main sewers under the control of the Metropolitan Board. The Board's main sewers were lowered some years since, in order that the drainage might be made more effective, and a subsidiary main sewer was made to take the storm water during heavy rain. Observations, which are always made by the Board's officers after heavy storms, show that the Board's new main sewer in Kentish Town Road has never yet been filled since its construction. The local sewers, which belong to the Vestry, ought to have been lowered when the Board's sewers were lowered; but this work has not been done. The reconstruction of the local sewers at a lower level would probably be effectual to prevent the flooding complained of.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Government will consider whether it may be possible, in the Autumn Session, to introduce a Bill for the reconstitution of the Scotch Fishery Board, a Bill to create District Fishery and Harbour Boards for Scotland, as recommended by the Fishery Board, and a Bill relating to salmon and trout fishing in Scotland?

Yes, Sir. The subject will be considered during the Recess.

asked the noble Viscount the Vice Chamberlain, Whether he was in a position to state what grants, if any, had been made, or if it had been decided to make a grant, out of the specially allotted sum of £5,000, to any agricultural or dairy school, or otherwise for the advancement of agriculture; and, if no such information could now be given, whether he would lay on the Table of the House a statement of such grants, and the conditions on which they had been given?

, in reply, said, he was unable at the moment to afford the desired information; but he would make inquiries and ascertain if it were possible to comply with the request which had been made.

said, he wished to ask the Solicitor General for Ireland a Question of which he had given him private Notice in reference to the sentence of Mr. J. J. O'Kelly, M.P. It was, Whether the attention of the hon. and learned Gentleman had been called to the statements on cross-examination of Constable Clear, a witness in the case, to the effect—

"That he had given drink to witnesses whom he had summoned to attend a private inquiry under the Crimes Act at Loughrea. That he gave the witnesses the drink in the ordinary course of friendship in a general way, the same as to any others, not knowing at the time that they would become witnesses, and that he had not given drink to persons after he had known they had become witnesses."

said, his attention had only been called to the matter by the Question of the hon. Gentleman, and he was not in a position now to give an answer; but he would make inquiries.

I wish to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman, whether the Government will take any steps to remit the sentence passed on my hon. Friend (Mr. O'Kelly) on the evidence of persons who, according to this policeman, had been supplied with drink by him; and, also, whether the Government, who frequently issue Circulars to the Constabulary Force in Ireland, would have any objection to inform the police that it is undesirable and criminal to give drink to persons about to be examined on oath with a view to influence their evidence?

The Question of the hon. Member is founded on the hypothesis that the drink was given to the witness. I have promised to make inquiry into the matters of fact.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman take care to inquire into the point of the Question—that is, whether there is any provision in the funds voted by Parliament to supply money to Constabulary to be spent in this way?

I will require Notice of the Question.

I will put the Question on the Paper for Monday, and I will require a full and complete answer.

I wish to state that it was this very constable that followed me about the country when I went to Ireland to be elected a Member of Parliament.

Order, order!

I wish to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman, whether it is true that Mr. O'Kelly, the Member for Roscommon, has been sentenced to four months' imprisonment for a speech delivered at a public meeting; whether the offence—if there was any offence at all—was not the offence of sedition, sedition being a political offence; and, whether the Government approve of a sentence usually inflicted on criminals of a burglar type?

I must ask the hon. Gentleman to put the Question on the Paper.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether the inquiry into the outbreak of small-pox at St. Joseph's Industrial Schools, Manchester, will be held immediately, while the fullest amount of evidence is obtainable; whether the Report of the results of the inquiry will be presented to the House before the Civil Service Estimates are taken in the Autumn Session; and, whether the Report will include the original Report of Dr. Oldham, of Monsall Hospital, referred to in his reply of yesterday.

The inquiry will take place immediately. As to the period at which the result of the inquiry will be received, and as to what the Report will include, it is not for me to say.

asked, Whether the right hon. Gentleman would consent to a Return giving the names and ages of all the patients; their condition as regards vaccination, giving the number of the scars in the same form as that given in the Report of Dr. Oldham, and the course and result of the illness in each case?

I will take care to give the fullest information.

I beg to give Notice that I shall move for such a Return.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the steps taken to circulate the evidence taken before the Lords' Committee on Sweating would be taken with regard to the Pauper Immigration Committee; and, whether, considering the generally expressed desire for an increased number of Factory and Workshop Inspectors, if the Trades' Unions were willing to pay the expenses of the services of an additional number of Inspectors, the Government would accept the offer, reserving to themselves, of course, the right to accept or reject the candidates proposed by the Trades' Unions?

in reply, said, he was not in a position to give an answer to such a Question, based on a hypothetical offer of a certain organization to bear the cost of a number of public officers, without notice.

said, that the Solicitors' Bill, which occupied the eighth place on the Order Paper, had apparently been read a second time that morning by mistake. He had waited in the House until 3 A.M., and had then left under the impression that the second reading would not be taken. In the circumstances, he hoped that the Committee stage would not be proceeded with that evening.

The right hon. Gentleman is quite right. The second reading of the Bill was taken by inadvertence, the Attorney General not being aware of the arrangement that had been come to. The Bill will not be proceeded with further during this Sitting. I may take this opportunity of saying that the Adjournment will be moved to-night after the 20th or last Government Order on the Paper (Report of the East India Revenue Accounts). The view of the Government is that the House will not desire to proceed with private Members' Bills. The arrangement will be as follows:—We shall proceed down to No. 7 (Patents, Designs, and Trades Marks Bill), and then take the Municipal Funds (Ireland) Bill, the Local Bankruptcy (Ireland) Bill, Lloyd's (Signal Stations) Bill, the Divisional Magistrates (Ireland) Bill, and the East India Revenue Accounts. I may state that I propose, at the Sitting of the House to-morrow, and if there is no other Business to be taken coming down to us from "another place," to move—"That the House, at its rising on Monday"—assuming that the Commission is fixed for Monday for the Royal Assent to Bills which have been passed—"do adjourn to Tuesday, the 6th November."

The other Orders will not be proceeded with?

They will not.

asked, whether the right hon. Gentleman held out any hopes that facilities would be given later on in the Session for the consideration of the Lords' Amendments to the Libel Law (Amendment) Bill?

said, he was hardly in a position to say that facilities would be afforded. Certainly he would be glad to give all the assistance in his power to the consideration of the Lords' Amendments on that Bill, for he thought it would be a great misfortune were all the labour expended upon it to be thrown away. The House was aware that the Government must be careful about making promises in favour of one Bill of a private Member over that of another.

asked what Business would be taken to-morrow?

We must transact such Business to-morrow as may appear on the Paper. If we get over the Business on the Paper to-day, we must take such other measures as require consideration.

asked, if the Wednesday Rule would apply to the Sitting to-morrow?

said, it would. The House would meet at 12 o'clock.

said, that no attempt to deal with the Irish Mortmain Acts had been made since Dean Swift, in 1737, petitioned against a Bill then before the Irish House of Lords, and he wished clearly to understand whether the Bill applied to Ireland?

said, that it had been found impossible to make the Bill applicable to Ireland, and Amendments had therefore been inserted providing that its operation should not extend to the Sister Isle, though the words might have been clearer.

said, that he had been obliged to suggest that the Bill should not apply to Ireland, as the Irish Acts were different and separate from the English Acts. But he hoped an opportunity would be found for consolidating the law on the question.

said, he thought the University Colleges of Wales should be freed from the restrictions of the Mortmain Acts. They had a greater claim to exemption than Oxford and Cambridge, which were already so rich, or even than London or Victoria University. London, Durham, and Victoria Universities were freed by the Bill from the operation of the Mortmain Acts. He would move an Amendment to free the Welsh Colleges from this restriction.

said, he must ask the hon. Gentleman not to press the Amendment. He had considerable misgiving that the exemptions from the restrictions of the Mortmain Acts had already gone rather far; and if the present Amendment were accepted there were a number of other institutions which might come forward and ask for similar exemption, and he should have no answer to make to them.

thought he had no alternative but to go to a Division.

said, he would recommend the hon. and learned Member not to press his Amendment, because the argument of the hon. and learned Attorney General was, he said, unanswerable.

, in asking the House to allow the Bill to be read the third time, said he would take occasion, on behalf of the Government, to thank right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite for the extremely fair way in which they had met the Bill. He was aware that many of them held strong views with regard to alterations in the Law of Mortmain—he himself would like to see some changes introduced—but they had recognized that it was impossible to deal with such questions in a Consolidation Bill.

, in moving an Amendment empowering the Lord Chancellor in any case, by special order, to dispense with the requirements as to standing and residence of registrars, said, he agreed that generally registrars should be solicitors of a certain standing, and should reside in their districts; but there were exceptional cases which ought to be provided for.

said, he thought that it would be very undesirable to have applications constantly made to the Lord Chancellor to use his dispensing power. No practical difficulty had arisen in connection with the rule at present existing.

contended that the present restriction caused great inconvenience.

said, that the law had stood as it was for the last 30 or 40 years without any difficulties arising.

, asked, whether his right hon. Friend (Mr. E. Stanhope) would let it be clearly understood that the Volunteers and the Yeomanry would remain under this Bill precisely in the same position as they now occupied?

said, that the hon. and gallant Gentleman was quite right as regarded the Volunteers, who would not be in any way affected by this measure. The Bill, however, would enable the Yeomanry to be called out with the Militia, which would greatly add to the value of the force.

, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that it had been introduced with the object of carrying out the recommendations of the Committee over which Lord Herschell had presided. It was not proposed to take the Committee stage before November.

asked, what would be the effect of postponing the clause?

said, that the Committee could not entertain a Money Clause until a Resolution had been set up. It would be set up to-morrow, and the clause would then be considered by the House. The House could not consider the matter until the Money Resolution had been set up in this way.

asked, whether the clause would be considered to-morrow?

replied in the affirmative.

said, that before the Chairman left the Chair he should like to understand the exact position of the Bill. Could they take the Money Resolution in such order that it would be possible to dispose of that question and pass the third reading before the Adjournment?

said, the Resolution, which would be agreed to to-morrow, would be reported on Monday. Then the clauses could be considered in Committee.

said, this appeared to be a very important Bill, but he had never heard a word about it until this afternoon. He saw that it took enormous powers to enable a private Company to deal with telegraphing. He had looked carefully through the provisions of the measure, and could not see any corresponding advantages which were to accrue to this country, or even to the First Lord of the Admiralty, from giving these enormous advantages to a private Company. The other day he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) had heard the answer to a Question given by his noble Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty as to Lloyd's; and that answer was, so far as he could gather, that although Lloyd's had the power of telegraphing from a great many places, yet they never gave any notice to the Admiralty with regard to what was going on in connection with shipping or in regard to any other matters. To put in the hands of a private Company powers which were contained in this Bill was a thing which he thought deserved a great deal more attention than had been given to it, or than was likely to be given to it at that time of the Session. These powers were to be compulsory, without allowing the House or the public to know anything about it. There were a large number of reservations in the Bill so far as the Crown was concerned; but private individuals were not to have their interests safeguarded, and those interests might be affected by the Company without their consent. All, however, he would say on the matter was that the Bill appeared to him to be one which deserved far more consideration than they had been able to give to it in the short time that had been at the disposal of the Committee. He therefore hoped that his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) would not press the Bill, a Bill of such importance, through the House this Session.

If the hon. and gallant Member better understood what has happened with regard to this Bill, he would not speak in the way he does of faults which he imagines he has detected in it. The measure has been considered by a Select Committee, on which were Members who took considerable interest in these subjects, and who carefully considered the Bill. My hon. and gallant Friend is mistaken in supposing that the Bill proposes to give to Lloyd's the wide powers he imagines. What it proposes to do is this. There is a general desire on the part of those interested in the Mercantile Marine for better facilities than at present exist for giving early intelligence of wrecks occurring on our coasts, and thus saving life and property where it cannot now be saved, by improving the means of communication between our lighthouses and lightships and the mainland. Well, Sir, Lloyd's Association, which, as the Committee knows, is an Association not trading for gain, but a public Association, communicated with the Board of Trade last year, and expressed their willingness, for the sake of the promotion of the interests of commerce, and those great interests to which I have alluded, to take an active part in providing these means of telegraphic communication, if certain powers were given to them to obtain signal stations for the purpose. These powers amounted to no more than this—power to acquire land on the coast near the lighthouses or lightships to an extent not exceeding two acres in any one case, for the purpose of providing this telegraphic communication between the lighthouses and the lightships and the mainland. That power is guarded first by the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, which is incorporated in this Bill, and under which any landowner whose land is taken can, of course, have compensation assessed by arbitrators in the ordinary way; but, further, it is guarded in this way—that no laud can be compulsorily taken except after the matter has been fully considered by the Board of Trade; a local inquiry has been, if necessary, held, and a Provisional Order has been passed through Parliament. Therefore I think that my hon. and gallant Friend and the House will see that every care has been taken to guard private rights in endeavouring to secure what I think the House will admit to be, if it can be obtained, a great public gain. I trust that the House will be willing to proceed with the Bill, because, as I have already said, there is great need of this improved means of communication. The winter is approaching; and life and property may be saved if in some places these stations can be established where they are not now established. I trust, therefore, that the passing of the Bill will not be impeded.

said, he had only recently become acquainted with the contents of the Bill, and he was sorry to find himself obliged to offer some opposition to the Committee stage being taken at this time unless the Board of Trade would consent to introduce in it an Amendment to guard our interests as a Naval Power. Apparently all that had been thought of in framing the Bill had been to do what Lloyd's Association desired—to enable them to acquire land for the erection of signal stations for certain purposes as to which the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Trade had given them a careful explanation. Of course, there was not a single man in the House who would not sympathize with what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet as to the desirability of everything being done which could be done by the erection of telegraphic stations for the purpose of trying to save life from ships that were wrecked on our coasts; but the interests of this country, so far as it was a Naval Power, had not been thought of. There was a Saving Clause in the Bill in the interests of the Admiralty and the War Office; but when they read it what did it mean? It meant that nothing in the Bill should authorize Lloyd's Association to interfere with any lands, buildings, or rights inherent in the Board of Admiralty or War Office. But he maintained that a great deal more than that was required in this Bill. If he wanted more proof of what he said, he would only point to those pieces of intelligence which had been telegraphed all over this country as to the Naval Manœuvres which were taking place all round the coasts. The Admiralty ought to have endeavoured to guard their rights in this respect, and to prevent this intelligence from being flashed all over the country. There ought to be a Saving Clause at the end of Clause 5, empowering the Postmaster General in time of war to acquire possession of all those telegraph stations for the purpose of preventing the transmission of any intelligence concerning the movements of our Fleet or the movements of an enemy's Fleet by irresponsible persons. He maintained that the clauses of the Bill had not been carefully thought out. He did not care twopence for anything but our naval supremacy; and he must say that if hon. Gentlemen sitting on the opposite Bench did not think it right to guard our rights in these important particulars, it was the duty of someone else to take care that those rights were not jeopardized. By this Bill they were granting for all time a power which they would find very difficult to resume when they required to resume it without paying large compensation; and he (Admiral Field) would be no party to passing the Bill through Committee unless the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Trade would give some guarantee that steps would be taken, by an Amendment in Clause 5, to safeguard the rights of the country in the way in which they ought to be safeguarded. As to the Committee of which the right hon. Baronet had spoken, all he (Admiral Field) knew was that he had not been a Member of it, and he did not think any naval man had been on it. If there was no naval man on such a Committee, the Government should take care that naval interests were not jeopardized, seeing that we were the greatest Naval Power in the world. He was astounded that no one thought it necessary to look after our naval interests in connection with a Bill of this kind.