I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to the cruelties which attend the importation of live cattle into this country from transatlantic ports, and to the dangers to merchant seamen in connection therewith; whether his Department has evidence to show that the prohibition of the shipment to this country of live cattle for food would necessarily raise the price of meat to the consumer, seeing that the cattle now so shipped could also be shipped as dead meat; and, if so, to what probable amount; whether he has any Statutory powers for regulating the traffic in live cattle, so as to prevent the cruelties referred to; and, if so, under what Acts; and whether he is prepared to make regulations under these Acts for the prevention of the cruelties complained of pending further legislation?

Yes, Sir, my attention has been called to the suffering of cattle referred to in the first paragraph of the question, which, I am afraid, is inseparable from every passage across the Atlantic in bad weather. With regard to the second paragraph, we have certainly no evidence to show that the prohibition of the shipment to this country of live cattle for food from transatlantic ports would raise the price of meat to the consumer; on the contrary, I should say, from inquiries I have made since the question appeared on the Paper, that the presumption would be the other way. I am informed that the meat of American cattle killed in Great Britain was selling to-day at 3s. 9d. per stone of 81b., while the meat of animals killed in America, and sent to this country as dead meat, was selling at 2s. 7d. In reply to the third paragraph, the Board of Agriculture has considerable powers under the Con- tagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1878–1890, to make regulations for the purpose of preventing the cruelties referred to. And in reply to the last paragraph, I may say that I have already arranged for the appointment of a Joint Departmental Committee of the Board of Trade and the Board of Agriculture to consider what further regulations may be necessary to prevent, or, at all events, to minimise, as far as possible, the suffering of cattle on their passage across the Atlantic.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Secretary of State has seen in the Times of India, of 9th April, 1890, a Resolution of the Government of Bombay, relating to trees on occupied lands in Kolaba, in paragraph 30, where it is stated—

"The same terms as are being offered in Thana under paragraphs 9, 10, and 13 of Government Resolution, No. 2447, dated 8th April, 1890, may for this purpose be offered in Kolaba;"

whether what purports to be Government Resolution No. 2447, dealing with trees in occupied lands, Thana, has been published in the Times of India of 12th April; whether he will state what were the terms mentioned in paragraphs 9, 10, and 13, of the Resolution No. 2447, of 8th of April, and whether they contained important concessions to cultivators; whether he will state why this Resolution has not been published in the Government Gazette; and whether the Government of Bombay having refused, in their letters Nos. 3024 and 4163, to supply copies of the Resolution to the Forest Association of Thana, he will give instructions for the publication of the Resolution, as framed by Lord Reay's Government, so that the cultivators in the Kolaba and Thana districts may obtain the benefits which it was intended they should derive?

The answer to the first paragraph of the question of the hon. Member is in the affirmative. The Secretary of State has seen the Resolution from paragraph 3, and not 30, of which the quotation is taken. The answer to the second para- graph is in the negative. The other Resolution, No. 2447, has not been published. In answer to the third paragraph, I have to say that the Secretary of State cannot state the terms of the Resolution, because the document in question is marked confidential. The Secretary of State is not aware whether the Government of Bombay has refused to publish the document, nor, if so, on what grounds. The Secretary of State is not aware of the refusal of the Government of Bombay to publish the Resolution, and the matter seems to be one of local administration, with which, as at present advised, he should not interfere. The hon. Member's question will be sent to India in ordinary course.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether he has yet received any answer to his inquiries into the case of the Dacoit Boh Yan Myun's trial in Burmah?

No telegram has reached me on the subject.

When does the right hon. Gentleman expect to hear?

Probably by Monday next; inquiry is being made.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Indian Government documents relating to the acquisition of the lands and material in certain of the states of Buudelkund, Central India, for the purposes of the Indian Midland Railway, numbered respectively 357, 359, 272, 2,550, G86, 584, and 756, of 1886, concerned all the States through which the railway runs, and covered the acquisition of all lands, and the purchase of timbers, stones, &c.; whether in the engagements entered into under these documents a sum of about five lakhs of rupees have been claimed by certain chiefs of States in Bundelkund; whether, notwithstanding such engagements, Mr. Henvey, the Agent of the Governor General of Central India, has recommended that no compensation be paid to the chiefs, on the ground that collateral advantages may hereafter accrue to them; and whether the Government will lay upon the Table the Papers relating to the transactions entered into with any and all of the chiefs of States in Bundelkund, through which the Indian Midland Railway runs, by the contractors for the railway, or by any other parties in connection with the railway.

With the exception of No. 272, which was the subject of my reply on the 3rd of July, none of the documents referred to in the question can be traced. The question will be sent to the Government of India in ordinary course.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that the Post Office Savings Bank Department has refused to accept the transfer of moneys, deposited by the Trustees of the Camberwell branch of the Amalgamated Society of Painters and Decorators, with the Trustees of the Camberwell Savings Bank, to the Post Office Savings Bank; and, if so, on what grounds the refusal is based; whether he is aware that the moneys aforesaid, amounting to £118 1s. 3d., were deposited in the Camberwell Savings Banks under the Friendly Societies' Clause, as a Friendly Society, and was entered as G. 583 in the said bank; whether the Amalgamated Society of Painters and Decorators is a Friendly Society within the meaning of the Act, and has been allowed, as such, to deposit its funds in Trustee or Post Office Savings Banks for many years, and has now deposited funds in the Post Office Savings Banks of the country; whether he is aware that this branch of the Amalgamated Society of Painters and Decorators is unable, by reason of the closing of the Camberwell Savings Bank, and the refusal of the Post Office to accept the transfer of its funds, to make payments to its members for sickness, funeral, accident, out of work, and other benefits; and, whether he will cause such transfer to be accepted without delay, in accordance with the existing law and practice in similar cases?

The National Debt Commissioners are responsible for what has happened, and, therefore, the question ought to have been addressed to me instead of my right hon. Friend. I am making inquiries into the matter, and will be glad if the right hon. Member will postpone the question until tomorrow.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is a fact, as has been stated, that the assets under the control of the Official Liquidator of the Chelsea Savings Bank are sufficient to pay all the depositors in full; and, if so, can he inform the House why the depositors have not been paid in full; whether it is true, as alleged, that the costs of the Solicitors, Messrs. Hare & Co., of the Official Liquidator, and of the Treasury Agents already amount to the sum of £3,000; and whether he will lay upon the Table of this House a statement of the costs and charges in connection with the winding up of the affairs of the Chelsea Savings Bank?

No, Sir; the assets are not absolutely sufficient to pay all the depositors in full. But those who are not paid in full will receive 19s. 8d., when the Official Liquidator pays a further dividend of 4s. 8d., which he hopes shortly to be able to do. The costs and remuneration of the liquidator will bo settled, and the solicitors' charges will be taxed by the Court, in accordance with the usual scale, and together will probably exceed £3,000. But this is only an estimate. I will consider the question of laying a statement upon the Table, such as the hon. Member suggests.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for "War what is the total amount paid, and to be paid, to Mr. Brennan for his torpedo; how much of it was payable as a lump sum, and how much as an annual payment, or payments, and for how many years; and who recommended these payments?

The total amount to be paid to Mr. Brennan for his torpedo was £110,000, of which £30,000 was paid in a lump sum, and the balance at the rate of £16,000 a year for five years. These payments were recommended by the Secretary of State for the time being, after consultation with several military and naval officers.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware that the archbishop's throne which was presented to Canterbury Cathedral by Archbishop Tenison, and which was designed and executed by Grinling Gibbons, has for many years past been stowed away as lumber in a damp cellar adjacent to the cathedral cloisters; and whether he will, on behalf of the Department of Science and Art, apply to the Dean and Chapter for the loan of this beautiful and interesting work, in order that it may be rescued from its present unsatisfactory position, and preserved in the Kensington Museum?

I am very much obliged to my right hon. Friend for calling attention to the matter, and shall be glad to act upon his suggestion as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the discrepancy between the statement made by him explanatory of the Navy Estimates, 1889–90 (pages 5 and 6), where the nine first class cruisers and the 29 second class cruisers are all given a "speed at sea (continuous steaming) of 18 knots," whilst in the Navy Estimates, published in February of this year, the same first class cruisers are given a continuous seagoing speed of 96 hours duration, natural draught, in smooth water, and with clean bottoms, of 16¼ knots an hour, and the second class cruisers mentioned above a speed of 16 knots; and whether he can explain these differences?

The particulars given for these cruisers at pages 5 and 6 of the statement were supplemented by those given on pages 182 and 188 of the Navy Estimates for 1889–90. From the latter it will be seen that the figures for speeds relate to maximum trial speeds—with forced draught, 20 knots, and natural draught, 18 knots, respectively. The words continuous steaming, as the context shows, were used to contrast the speed developed under forced draught for four hours, and that under natural draught for a longer period. Since the preparation of the Estimates for 1889–90, and the explanatory statement thereon, the whole question of the probable development of power in Her Majesty's ships when steaming continuously at sea for long periods has been re-considered. A number of trials have been made with ships on service, and the figures published in the Navy Estimates for 1890–91 represent the results of the inquiry, and the calculated speeds corresponding to the powers that will probably be developed for long periods under the conditions of actual service. I may add that the capacity and boiler power of these vessels have been largely increased, and are some 20 per cent, in excess of that contained in the original design.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, in view of the action of the London County Council with respect to increasing the rating of voluntary school building's, the Government will promote legislation to exempt public elementary schools from rating, so as to prevent the extinction of many voluntary schools?

If the threatened steps to increase the rating of elementary schools are seriously intended, a large number of voluntary schools must inevitably be closed, and in order to avert such a disaster there can be no doubt that the demand for the exemption of all public elementary schools from rating will, in the general interests of the ratepayers, become more pressing, but at this stage of the proceedings it would, I think, be premature to pledge the Government to any particular course of action.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what part of the £965 paid yearly to the Master Surveyor and Keeper of the Hawks was originally for salary, and what part was for the purchase and maintenance of hawks; whether he has observed that the Act 2 and 3 Will. 4, c. 96, Clause 9, whereby the pensions to the Marquess of Down-shire and other persons were first charged on the Civil List, directs the same to be so charged "during the pleasure of His Majesty"; whether he will state if, since the Treasury proposed that the pay of £162 10s. yearly to the warders of Hillsborough Fort shall continue until "the resignation or demise of the present recipients of the allowances," steps have been taken to ascertain who the recipients are, and what are their respective ages and consequent expectations of life, so as to determine whether the allowances, before they lapse, will amount in the aggregate to a large or only to a small sum, in order to enable the House to "pass an opinion on each agreement to commute," as invited by the last paragraph of the Treasury Minute of 15th July; and whether the Treasury has any reason to expect that any of the warders will tender their "resignation," and so terminate their allowances before demise?

If the hon. Member will refer to the reply which I gave on Tuesday to my hon. Friend the Member for Preston, and to the appendix of the Report of the Select Committee, he will find all the information asked for in his first and second questions. Payment to the warders would only be made on direct proofs of life and of tenure of office.

The right hon. Gentleman did not answer part of my question the other day, namely, whether all the payments will be commuted at the same rate?

Certainly, Sir; but I think I did answer that question the other day.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware that the School Board of Hullavington, Wilts., in advertising for a certificated master from Michaelmas next for the mixed School Board of Hullavington, the wife or sister of such master to take infants and needlework, have intimated that—

"The present teacher (mistress) takes the church services, for which she receives separate remuneration."

And—

"That if the master had a daughter to take pupil teacher's place it would be a great inducement to his appointment."

And that candidates—

"Must he members of the Church of England;"

whether, having regard to the Cowper Temple Clause and other provisions of the Education Act of 1870, a School Board is within its legal right in insisting on membership of any particular Church as a necessary qualification for teachers; and whether the Education Department will take stops to prevent the imposition of such religious tests?

I have no information beyond that given in the question, but some years ago the Department took a legal opinion upon a similar point, and they were advised that they had no power to interfere with such an advertisement.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies if the Imperial Government controls the labour traffic in the islands of the Pacific for the supply of the Queensland plantations, and takes measures to prevent the forcible abduction of natives and other abuses; whether the Naval Officers, acting with the Western Pacific High Commission, have orders to safeguard the liberties of the natives; whether any regulations and instructions have been issued for the guidance of Her Majesty's Officers in that matter, and where they are to be found; and whether it is true that N. MacNeil, and other British subjects, convicted in the Qeeensland Courts of the murder of natives on the high seas, in the year 1884, and whoso death sentences were commuted to penal servitude for life, have since received a free pardon, and are now at large; if so, whether the pardon was given by the Government of Queensland, with the sanction and approval of the Secretary of State, or solely on the advice of the ColonialMinisters?

If the hon. Member will refer to the Pacific Islanders' Protection Acts, 1872 and 1875, I think he will find the information he requires. Instructions are, from time to time, sent to the Naval Officers, but these have not been published. The prisoners referred to have not received a free pardon, but their sentences have been remitted, and they are now at large. The remission was granted by the Governor of the colony, on the advice of his Ministers.

Did the Secretary of State for the Colonies sanction the pardon?

I should have thought the hon. Member would have known that the Secretary for the Colonies had no power to interfere in the matter.

As this was a case of murder on the high seas was it not dealt with by the Imperial Court, and not by the local Queensland Court?

No, Sir.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the account stands in regard to the pictures purchased for the National Gallery, a few years ago, under the arrangement by which the excess amount was to be recouped from the usual allowance for the purchase of pictures, how much has been recouped in this manner, and how much remains unrecouped?

Out of the total grant of £87,600 for the Blenheim pictures, £55,600 will have been recouped under the arrangement mentioned by the hon. Member by the end of the present year, leaving an unrecouped balance of £31,900.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the quality of the water supplied by the Grand Junction Water Company, which contained on 24th July 33 percent, more organic ammonia than the sample taken on 23rd July, 1889, and nearly double the amount of that contained in the Chelsea Water Company's water, namely, 16·4, as against 9·2, per 100 mil.; also the solids, on heating, showed a marked blackening, and the colour was of a marked yellow colour; whether this all indicates bad filtration; and what penalty attaches to supplying water of such an inferior character?

My attention had not been called to the quality of the water of the Grand Junction Water Company on the date referred to, until my hon. Friend gave notice of his question. I do not know where my hon. Friend gets his figures from. I may, however, say that, so far as regards the water supplied by this company in the earlier part of the present month, the Report of Dr. Frankland, by whom analyses of the water of the London Water Companies are made on behalf of my Department, was to the effect that the improved quality which the Thames-derived waters have of late exhibited had been maintained. With regard to the supply on the date referred to, the result of the inquiries which I have caused to be made is, that I find that on July 24, and for some days before and after that date, the Thames was swollen with rain, and the water was turbid and highly tinted with colouring matter, no doubt mainly derived from the abundant vegetation, cut grass, &c, spread about in the Thames Valley. At the same time, there can be no question that the want of adequate filtration arrangements prevented the company from effectually coping with the difficulties referred to. The attention of the Directors has been repeatedly called in the Reports of the Water Examiner of the Metropolis to the necessity for increased filters, and I am glad to learn that, in view of the evidence which has been afforded of the need for a larger filtering area, in order to deal with exceptional conditions of the river, the company have intimated that the construction of additional filters will be undertaken without delay. Dr. Tidy, by whom the waters of the company are analysed, states that no such thing as organic ammonia exists in the water, but is manufactured during the process of analysis. The special material to which the colouring matter of the water is due, yields large quantities of the so-called organic ammonia, the quantitative estimation of which is no reliable test whatever of pollution. In justice to the Water Company I think it right to state that I am informed by the Water Examiner that the filters, as now existing, are capable of dealing satisfactorily with the water when the river is in a normal condition, and the Directors appear to have been erroneously impressed by the fact that during the past 18 months the company's water showed on several occasions, in Dr. Frankland's tables of the results of his chemical analysis, the smallest proportion of organic impurity of any of the Thames-deriving companies. In fact, in its average proportion of organic elements during 1889 the company appears to stand, with the Lambeth Company, second in degree of purity of the river-drawing companies. I see no ground in the communications which I have received on the subject for the suggestion that the appearance of the water, or the results of the analysis, show sewage contamination.

Is the right hon. Gentleman able to say whether the water of the Grand Junction Company did not contain much higher percentage of organic ammonia than the water from the Chelsea Company?

There is no doubt that the filtering power of the Grand Junction Company, as compared with that of the Chelsea Company, is deficient. Assuming that what my hon. Friend says is correct, although I have no knowledge of that, it is undoubtedly due to that fact.

My authority is the public analyst of the Vestry of St. George's, Hanover Square, who is also analyst for Kensington.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Uniform Committee has finished its sittings; whether it has presented a Report; and whether it is intended to supplement the inquiries of the Committee by sending round to all ships in commission an outline of the recommendations of the Committee before giving effect to them?

I understand that the Committee appointed to consider the question of the uniforms of officers of the Royal Navy have practically concluded their inquiry, but they have not yet presented their Report. Until the Report has been considered by the Board of the Admiralty it is impossible to say what further action, if any, will be found desirable; but no material changes in the existing uniforms would be made without further consultation with the Service afloat.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether sub-postmasters are entitled to any holiday, and whether they have some substitute not at their own cost during such holiday; and whether, in the case of large sub-offices where three clerks are employed, these clerks are appointed from the established Service, or whether they must be provided and paid for by the sub-postmasters?

(1) Sub-postmasters are not required to give their whole time to the Service, and are not entitled to annual leave of absence at the cost of the Department. (2) The Sub-postmasters are paid in accordance with the amount of business transacted, and out of their pay they have to provide any assistance which they may need in carrying on the duties.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recommendations of the Visitors who held the recent inquiry at Chatham Convict Prison have been adopted; and what recommendations, if any, have not been acted upon by the Executive?

Some of the recommendations of the Committee were already the practice of the prison. The others have all been acted upon by the Prison Board, except that they have not thought it necessary to issue any order with respect to the recommendation contained in paragraph 45 of the Report, as they considered the complaint as to the gates outside their cells not being un- locked for the admission of breakfast and tea to be of a trivial nature.

Has it not been recommended that Durban, one of the persons mentioned in the Report, should be reinstated?

Was not this man Durban degraded and removed from his position on the recommendation of the officials of the prison? Is it the case that he is now employed in compounding medicines, and, among others, for the prisoner Daly?

I must ask for notice of those questions.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Hon. Cecil Rhodes, the new Premier of the Cape Colony, has given notice of a Motion in the House of Assembly, that that House regretted that the Cape Government had not been consulted with regard to the Anglo-German Agreement, as far as it concerned the territory south of the Zambesi, and that the Cape Colony ought to have a voice in any subsequent agreement regarding such territory; whether it is true that no intimation was given to the Cape Government until the terms of the Concession to Germany of the territory stretching to the Upper Zambesi were settled; and whether, in any future negotiations involving cessions of territory or "spheres of influence," which affect the interests of British Colonies, a proper opportunity will be given to the authorities of such colonies to lay their views before Her Majesty's Government, in time for them to be fairly considered, before such negotiations are completed?

I beg also to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is now in a position to state what was the nature of the communications that passed between the Home Government and the Government at the Cape with reference to the matters dealt with in the Anglo-German Agreement, and more particularly with reference to those portions of the Agreement which concerned the territory south of the Zambesi?

Her Majesty's Government have seen the report of Mr. Rhodes's notice of Motion in the newspapers. Communications in respect of Walfisch Bay and Damaraland passed with the Cape Ministers before the Anglo-German Agreement was signed. The High Commissioner also made various communications to Her Majesty's Government, relating to the retention of Lake Ngami and the keeping open of the route northwards. Her Majesty's Government can give no such general pledge as the hon. Member for East Northampton proposes in the third paragraph of his question; but it may be assumed that every opportunity which is possible will be given to the colonies directly affected by international negotiations to lay their views before Her Majesty's Government?

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that H.M.S. Thrush left England on 1st June for Gibraltar and Las Palmas, instructions being left that mails for the vessel should be sent on without delay to those places, and that although the Thrush stayed a fortnight at Gibraltar, reaching Las Palmas on or about 30th June, up to 1st July last the only mails addressed to the Thrush that had been delivered were those of the 6th and 7th of June; can he explain why the mail steamer reaching Las Palmas on 1st July brought no mails for the Thrush; and whether he will take measures to insure the punctual despatch of mails to Her Majesty's ships of war, according to the instructions given?

Correspondence is despatched hence to Her Majesty's ships with the utmost regularity in accordance with addresses furnished by the Admiralty to the Post Office, and no fresh measures are required. I find that the Thrush left on the 1st of June; that the address furnished for her mails up to the 17th was Gibraltar, and after the 17th Bermuda; and that the mails were punctually despatched to those addresses. The steamer referred to by the hon. Member as reaching Las Palmas without mails for the Thrush would seem to have been that despatched from Liverpool on the 21st of June, when the mails were already being sent to Bermuda.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is now in a position to inform the House if the purchase of the submarine cables by the English and French Governments has proved a financial success; and whether he can state the share of profits realised by the two Governments respectively, and give any statistics showing the increased number of words and messages forwarded over stated previous annual periods?

In reply to the hon. Member I have to state that a substantial profit will, no doubt, result from the purchase of the submarine cables between this country and the Continent; but it would be premature at present to estimate the amount of that profit in view of the condition of the cables. As the House is aware, some of these cables are very old, and it is possible that, before long, a considerable expenditure may have to be incurred in renewals. Not only so, but the necessity for additional plant has arisen, and a large sum will be spent in the course of the current financial year on a new cable and land line. The number of words in Anglo-French telegrams has risen from 13,376,333 in the year to the 31st March, 1889, to 15,495,791 in the year to the 31st March last. Other telegrams have passed over the Anglo-French cables, but I am not able to give separate particulars with regard to them.

Arising out of that question, I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the French Assembly has been asked for a Vote for an additional cable to England, also whether this House will be asked for a Vote for a new cable to France?

I have no knowledge of what has passed in the French Chamber. It is possible that it may be necessary there to ask for a Vote for a cable between France and England, but it is not necessary to ask Parliament for the money for a cable to France.

I beg to ask the Under Secre- tary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information as to the condition of Upper Macedonia, as described from personal experience by the special correspondent to the Daily News in the issue of the 29th instant; whether Her Majesty's Government have received any reports throwing light upon the brutal murders alleged to have been committed by Arnauts upon Christians in the neighbourhood of Pristina and Prisrend; and whether, in the event of the Porte being unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property of its Christian subjects in that Province, Her Majesty's Government would think it advisable to confer with the other Powers as to the best means of restraining the excesses of the Arnauts?

I am unable to add anything to the reply given to the hon. Member for Aberdeen on the 22nd instant, as we have received no subsequent information. No information has reached Her Majesty's Government which would, in their opinion, justify so serious a step as inviting a conference of the Powers on the internal affairs of Turkey.

Is anything being now done to fulfil the provisions of the Treaty of Berlin as to giving Home Rule to Macedonia?

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the present amount of the Floating Debt; what is the rate of interest at which the last issue of Treasury Bills was made; and whether he proposes to take any measures to reduce the amount of the Floating Debt, which is now considerably in excess of that at which it has generally stood in recent years?

The present amount of the Floating Debt in the hands of the public is about £23,000,000, as against an amount of a little under £14,000,000 in 1885–6. The present amount of Unfunded Debt held by the National Debt Commissioners is about £11,400,000, as against an amount of about £3,750,000 in 1885–6. The large increase under both heads is almost wholly due to conversion and redemption operations, and it must be remembered that the amount held by the National Debt Commissioners can be funded at any time. The last issue of Treasury Bills was made at about 3¾ per cent., but it would not be fair to let the rate of interest at any particular moment influence the judgment much. The average rate over a series of years for three months' Treasury Bills has been £2 6s. 8d., and for six months' Bills £2 12s. 2d., clearly a very remunerative rate for the Exchequer. The rate of interest during the current financial year up to date, taking three and six months' Bills together, works out at £2 11s. 5d., still a satisfactory result, but it is probable that the average will be higher during the remainder of the financial year. On the whole, the interest of the Floating Debt over a series of years has been materially in favour of the State as compared with the rate of Consols. Still, I am anxious gradually to reduce the amount of Unfunded Debt in the hands of the public, and I have that object constantly in view. The resources of the National Debt Commissioners afford me the means of doing so, and they would gradually absorb the excess. Another possible means of reducing the amount in the hands of the public would be the issue of Consols on a large scale, the proceeds of which would be applied to paying off Bills, but I do not contemplate such a course. It would disturb the money market and the Consol market, and would, under present circumstances, certainly not be profitable to the State. I look on a gradual reduction as a preferable policy. I hope that, if the right hon. Member will only give me time enough, I may leave a reduced amount of Unfunded Debt to whoever may be my successor.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the attention of Her Majesty's Government has been directed to a statement in the Times of 10th July, that an important concession for the salting and curing of pork at Nish has been granted to a British subject by the Servian Government; whether the Foreign Office has received any informa tion regarding this concession; and, whether Her Majesty's Consuls in the Danubian States have been instructed to report fully on such openings for British enterprise?

An exclusive concession for pork-curing has been granted to a British subject for 15 years, with certain requirements as to his erection of a factory and obligation to slaughter 60,000 hogs in the first year, 80,000 in the second, and 100,000 in the third, with many contingent privileges and immunities. Her Majesty's diplomatic and consular officers all over the world are instructed to report on enterprises which offer openings for British capital, and notices of such Reports are frequently published. These instructions were laid before Parliament in No. 16 Commercial, 1886.

May I ask. the right hon. Gentleman if it is to be clearly understood that the answer he has given is by no means an assurance or intimation of the opinion of the Government that this particular concern is a sound commercial investment?

No, Sir; I merely stated the effect of the Report made to the Foreign Office.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether there is a probability of the negotiations now pending for the grant of a lease of the Gwylwyr Sett Quarry, Pistyll, Carnarvonshire, being brought to a speedy and successful determination? I wish further to ask, whether, having regard to the vital importance of the Gwylwyr Sett Quarry, Pistyll, Carnarvonshire, to the quarrying population in that district, he will take steps to ensure that no lease shall be granted of that quarry which does not contain a proviso for its being worked by an edequate number of men; and whether, in the event of there being more than one application for such a lease, he will advise the selection of the applicant who has the greatest interest in and is the most likely to develop the quarry.

There is a probability that the negotiations will be brought to a speedy and successful determination. It is usual to insert in Crown leases of quarries a convenant requiring the employment of a certain number of men, and, so far as is known at present, there seems no reason for omitting that covenant in the case of the Gwylwyr Quarry.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he has received any communication from Messrs. Bryant & May, contradicting the official statement that, although appealing for public support on the ground that they were large employers of British labour, they had a factory in Sweden for the supply of the English market and Her Majesty's Service; and, further, if it is true that an annual contract has been recently renewed by Her Majesty's Government with a middleman for the supply of Swedish safety matches to order, and, in such case, if directions can be issued to the public Departments that, wherever practicable, goods made by British or Irish labour are to be ordered, having regard to the congested state of British labour, and the desirability of returning the taxation of the people, so far as circumstances allow, in industrial wages?

I should like to ask whether the recent statistics published by the Labour Bureau of the Board of Trade do not show that the labour market is not congested?

Before my right hon. Friend answers the question of the hon. Member for Northampton, let me ask him if the Reports of the Labour Department of the Board of Trade should not refer almost exclusively to the state of the skilled labour market, on the evidenceof the Trades Unions who consent to report, and not to the masses of unskilled labour?

I am afraid that it would be out of order if I were to enter into that matter. Since I answered a question on the same subject the other day, I have been informed by Messrs. Bryant & May that they ceased to have any interest in the Swedish factory at which the "Lion" matches are made, in 1886, and that their matches are made only at their Fairfield Works at Bow. I am unable to suggest to my right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works a course which would preclude his purchasing any articles necessary for the Public Service, even though such articles be manufactured abroad.

Does my right hon. Friend mean that, although British working men may be starving at the gates of Parliament for want of employment, public money may be fitly used in remunerating foreign labour?

; May I ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the periodical Returns of the Labour Department do not contradict the view that there is a congested state of the labour market?

I must ask for notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, as Colonel of the Grenadier Guards on full pay, is in any degree responsible for the discipline and efficiency of that regiment, or whether the appointment is a paid sinecure?

His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, as the Colonel of the Grenadier Guards, is in the same position as all other honorary colonels, and is in no way responsible for the discipline and efficiency of the regiment.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that some Tram and River Steamer Companies in the metropolitan district are in the habit of charging double, and, in some instances, quadruple, the ordinary fares on Bank Holidays; and, if so, whether this excess charge is legal?

This is a matter with which I have no power to deal; and, on the question of tact, no information has reached me. I cannot undertake to express any opinion on the legal point, but may observe that in the case of tramways the fares are fixed by the special Acts of Parliament.

Cannot these companies be compelled to fix up in legible characters outside a list of fares?

I cannot answer that question off-hand.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that a Convention has been signed with the Transvaal Government, and whether that Convention excludes Her Majesty's Government from the paramount position in Swaziland conceded to it under the Convention of 1884; and whether Her Majesty's Government have acquiesced in the demand of the Transvaal State for extension of their site to the sea?

Her Majesty's Government are not aware that a Convention has been signed with the Transvaal about Swaziland; but if the hon. Member will repeat his question in a few days, I trust that I may be in a position to give him some information on the subject. The hon. Member will see that it would not be in the public interest that I should give further information until negotiations are concluded.

I will repeat the question on Monday.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, referring to the telegrams from Zanzibar appearing in the Times of Saturday 26th July, which state that the Arabs at Zanzibar, under the influence of intriguing advisers, are becoming much alarmed as to the effect of the forthcoming British Protectorate on their slaves, is there any intention that the private property of Arabs in domestic slaves should be confiscated on the Sultanate passing under the protection of this country?

Her Majesty's Government have received no confirmation of the reported agitation among the Arabs. There is no intention of confiscating domestic slaves, but every effort will be made to insure the carrying out of the provisions of the Act of Brussels, and the prevention of abuses.

Are we to understand that when a country is put under the British flag, slavery is to be retained?

There is no idea of putting the dominions of the Sultan of Zanzibar under the British flag.

May I ask whether it has not been stated that the Protectorate of Zanzibar is to be established in a concrete fashion; and, if so, is slavery to be upheld?

I only said it is not intended to assume the Protectorate in so complete, not concrete, a fashion as to exclude the commerce of other Powers. I think it will be found that the measures to be taken on the coast will largely result in the suppression of slavery.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, when the Barham broke down for the third time on Thursday last, the engines were being worked at the guaranteed power of 6,000 horses; if not, at what rate; whether the main cause of this vessel's repeated breakdowns is that no margin is left for the expansion of the tubes when subject to intense heat, the result being that the tubes are forced through the plates at the fire-box, and thus the collapse of the boilers; and what steps are being adopted to make the vessel seaworthy, and also to prevent similar casualties occurring with the sister ship Bellona, now in course of completion?

The machinery of the Barham was not being worked on Thursday, the 24th inst., at the power specified, but at 3,800 horses, being 300 above the guaranteed natural draught power. The boilers of this ship are of the wet bottom locomotive type, and were constructed by a firm having great experience in boilers of this class in the usual manner, and with provision for expansion under heat. The cause of the leakage of the tubes is under investigation, and experiments are now being made as to the steps to be taken to overcome this defect, both in the Bellona as well as the Barham.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education if he can inform the House to what extent the Technical Instruction Act of last year has been put into operation in England and Ireland respectively, and to what extent "The Technical Schools (Scotland) Act, 1887,"has been availed of in Scotland?

I have no information as regards Scotland, but if the hon. Member will refer to pages 43 and 44 of the recent Report of the Science and Art Department, he will see that very gratifying progress is being made in bringing the Act of last Session into active operation.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, under Article I. of the General Act of the Conference at Berlin (1885), the Conference Powers agreed to use their good offices with the Governments established on the African shore of the Indian Ocean, for the purpose of obtaining their approval to the establishment of complete Free Trade within their respective territories, and, in any case, of securing the most favourable conditions to the transit traffic of all nations; and whether the Conference Powers did use their good offices in the sense indicated; and, if so, with what results?

I beg also to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been drawn to that part of the Declaration of the West African Conference embodied in Article VIII. of the Anglo-German Agreement, and whether, therefore, it will be beyond the rights of the German Authorities to levy duties upon British and Indian trade in the German Protec torate of Zanzibar, including the 600 miles of coast territory, of which Great Britain has engaged to facilitate the absolute cession to Germany; and, if not, in virtue of what special arrangement between Her Majesty's Government and Germany will the German Authorities be entitled to levy duties?

The Act of Berlin, which must be meant by the "Declaration of the West African Conference," stipulates that in a certain defined zone no Import or Transit Duties shall be levied. There is no restriction as to the levying of Export Duties except a provision against differential treatment. The prohibition as to Import Duties is modified by the Declaration appended to the Act of Brussels, which permits their being levied up to a maximum of 10 per cent, ad valorem except in the case of spirits. The territory of the Sultan of Zanzibar, though -within the zone, was not to be subjected to the trade system of the Act, except with His Highness's approval, which has not been given. Duties on British and Indian trade at Zanzibar, both on the mainland and on the coast administered by the British and German Companies, are levied in accordance with the Commercial Treaty of 1886, which allows a maximum of 5 per cent, on imports, excepting spirits, on which the duty is 25 per cent., and certain specified duties on exports. If a portion of the Zanzibar coast is ceded to Germany, duties on British and Indian goods will continue to be levied under the Treaty, or if the free zone system is applied under that system, as amended by the Brussels Act. Under either the trade is protected from any differential treatment or excessive burdens.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the second part of my question.

No, Sir; the Powers have never exercised their influence in the sense indicated.

What are the portions of the German sphere of influence within the limits of the Free Trade zone, to which the provisions of Article VIII. of the Anglo-German Agreement are to apply?

I must ask for notice of that question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is true that Mr. A. R. Sawyer, Assistant Inspector of Mines for the district of North Staffordshire, has resigned, or offered to resign, his appointment; if so, whether such resignation has been accepted by the Government; and whether he will state the alleged grounds for such resignation?

Yes, Sir; Mr. Sawyer resigned in February last. The ground of his resignation was that he was suffering from an affliction of the eyes, which was aggravated by his occupation as an Inspector of Mines. He retired on medical certificate, and received a pension from the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether the Chief Superintendent at the telegraph branch of the Liverpool Post Office has refused to allow a Petition from the Liverpool telegraphists, praying for the reinstatement of the exiled Cardiff telegraphists, to lie for signature within the official premises under his control; and whether this is contrary to usage?

No, Sir; I have received no information on the subject referred to in the question, but I will make inquiry.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether arrangements have yet been completed to accelerate the mails between London and the North-East of Scotland?

I am happy to inform the hon. Member that arrangements have been made for accelerating the night mail service between London and Aberdeen on and from the night of the 4th proximo. The mail will reach Aberdeen nearly an hour earlier, and the return mail to London will leave Aberdeen nearly an hour later.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, inasmuch as the laws relating to Parliamentary elections fill a very considerable space in the Statutes of the realm, and that the total number of Acts, and portions of Acts, now in force relating to such elections, qualification, disqualification, &c, of Members of this House, the qualification, registration, and mode of voting of electors, and other matters, extends to something like 180 Acts, the Government will, during the Recess, consider the propriety of preparing a measure for consolidating, amending, and simplifying the law relating to Parliamentary elections, and matters connected therewith?

The subject to which the hon. Gentleman calls the attention of the Government will receive very careful consideration.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Her Majesty's Government have advised or mean to advise Her Majesty in the issue of Royal Commissions or similar documents to give precedence by courtesy next after the Royal Family to Cardinal Manning or any other priest of any of the unestablished religious sects in this country; and, if so, whether that act of courtesy is one dependent on age, or any considerations other than the claims of the Religions Body to which he belongs?

I am not competent to express any opinion on such a difficult question as precedence. Such matters are regulated by Act of Parliament, and we have no intention of introducing a Bill on the subject.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether His Holiness the Pope, in the farewell audience granted to Sir Lintorn Simmons on the affairs of Malta, said that—

"Negotiations conducted in this way between the Holy See and Her Majesty's Government would be beneficial as regards the people of Malta, but might also be usefully extended to other parts of the Empire where Catholic interests were of great importance;"

and whether, in accordance with the suggestion of His Holiness, it is the intention of the Government to send special Missions to the Vatican to discuss questions of administration and legislation affecting Catholics in other portions of the British Empire besides Malta?

This is a Departmental question, and had better be answered by the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. In the case of purely Departmental questions (of which there are several on the Paper addressed to me) it would be better that they should be addressed to the person responsible, who would be able to give information which I cannot give myself.

The passage is correctly quoted from Sir Lintorn Simmons's Despatch of April 7, reporting his final audience to the Pope, which was presented to the House in Miscellaneous No. 1. Her Majesty's Government do not at present contemplate sending any further Mission to the Vatican.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is true, as stated by the correspondent of the Times, of 30th July, that the Russian Government have ordered the enforcement of supposed obsolete laws, which would compel all Jews in Russia now engaged in agriculture to abandon their occupations and migrate into the towns; to force all Jews living throughout Russia to migrate into 16 specified countries; to deny them any educational advantages; and to prevent their following the literal professions, such as the law and medicine; and whether, if this report be true, the Government will take steps, either alone or in conjunction with the other great Powers, to protest against such an exercise of arbitrary power upon the unoffending members of an important nationality, many of whom are domiciled in the British dominions?

According to information supplied by Her Majesty's Charge d' Affaires in St. Petersburg last month, no measure depriving the Jews of such privileges as they now enjoy in the Russian Empire was intended.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in the proposed Anglo-French Agreement, the Government will take care that in any enlargement of the sphere of influence of France in North Africa, complete freedom of trade shall be secured?

It is impossible for Her Majesty's Government to pledge itself in advance to make any particular stipulations, but it is manifestly their duty and intention to consult British interests to the utmost possible extent in any negotiations with foreign Powers. To require the abolition of all Customs Duties in territory on the southern frontier of Algeria would be to require the same abolition in Algeria itself, as an internal Custom House is evidently very difficult.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that Article VIII. of the Treaty of Paris stipulates that

"If there should arise between the Sublime Porte and one or more of the other Signing Powers any misunderstanding which might endanger the maintenance of their relations, the Sublime Porte, and each of such Powers, before having recourse to the use of force, shall afford the other contracting parties the opportunity of preventing such an extremity by means of their mediation;"

and whether Her Majesty's Ministers will consider the advisability of acting in conformity with this precedent, and of inserting arbitration clauses in agreements which they may hereafter make with Foreign Powers?

As the House has been already informed, Her Majesty's Government are favourable to arbitration where the circumstances render that course expedient; but they cannot enter into any such general engagement as is indicated.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the election by the Magistrates, on the 7th of July, of Mr. Hay, as Petty Sessions Clerk of the Kilna district; whether the late Petty Sessions Clerk of this district obtained his appointment on the condition of residence in Kilrea; whether Mr. Hay, who has been appointed in preference to several other candidates, fills the office of Petty Sessions Clerk in Coleraine, a town 18 miles distant from Kilrea; and whether this dual position is compatible with the due and efficient discharge of the duties of either post; whether he is aware that Mr. Hay had been previously dismissed from the clerkship of Petty Sessions in Coleraine in consequence of several grave irregularities in connection with that office, and was only reinstated to the post after two elections by the Magistrates; and what action, having regard to the circumstances of the case, does the Government propose to take with reference to the ratification of this gentleman's election to the Petty Sessions clerkship at Kilrea?

The Registrar of Petty Sessions Clerks reports that the late Clerk of Petty Sessions of Kilrea obtained his appointment on the condition of residence in Kilrea. He held that clerkship alone, and in such cases the rule is that a clerk must reside in his district. Mr. Hay, the present clerk, resides at Coleraine. He is permitted to do so because he holds the clerkship of Coleraine as well as that of Kilrea. Care will be taken that he makes adequate attendances at Kilrea, which is connected with Coleraine by rail. In many instances the duties of two or more districts are satisfactorily discharged by one clerk, and there is no reason to doubt that Mr. Hay's dual position is compatible. It is true that in 1867 Mr. Hay was dismissed from the clerkship of Coleraine, for irregularities resulting-from intemperance. He was re-elected at one, not two, elections, in November, 1888. The Lord Lieutenant, after long and careful consideration, approved of his re-appointment, all claims against Mr. Hay having been fully discharged, and it being shown that his life during the 21 years between dismissal and re-election had been steady and respectable. His conduct since re-appointment has been excellent, and His Excellency does not propose to interfere with his holding the clerkship of Kilrea.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether, when dealing with the case of the Cork telegraph office, under his new scheme, inquiry was made as to the relative cost of living and house rent in Cork and Belfast where the maximum pay for first-class telegraphists is to be 4s. a week in excess of that at Cork; whether such inquiry, if not already instituted, will be made; whether the classification and average amount of work performed by first-class telegraphists in Cork and Belfast are equal, and the strain on individuals identical in both cases; whether, in the new scheme, many offices that perform no night duty and deal with no heavy Press work are put on an equality with Cork with regard to pay though the latter, as regards both these harassing duties, is in the same category with the first-class offices in Ireland and England that are favoured with the new higher maximum salaries; and whether, in view of these circumstances, the claims of Cork, to be placed in an intermediate position as regards pay between these two classes of offices, as Belfast has been, will be considered, especially if the contention of the Cork staff that the cost of living and house rent in Belfast are not in excess of those in Cork should be found to be correct?

The points referred to have been considered, but the hon. Member must perceive that the position of the various towns and offices must be regarded from a somewhat larger point of view, and I am satisfied that, looking at the conditions of Cork as a whole, that it has been placed in its proper category, and that it would not be right for me to alter the arrangement.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether Mr. John S. Collins was one of the jury who tried the case of Captain Richard Tonson Rye, J.P., D.L., who was charged at the present Cork Assizes for unlawfully firing at and wounding Jeremiah Corcoran; is he aware that a Mr. John S. Collins wrote a letter to the Cork Constitution, the local Conservative paper, on the 11th April last, in which he condemned the Magistrates at Farran Petty Sessions for having sent the case forward for trial; and is this Mr. Collins the same person as the Mr. Collins who served on the jury; and, if so, how did it happen that he was allowed to sit on a case which he had publicly prejudged?

I have no means of obtaining information on the subject of this question. If it be true that Mr. Collins wrote the letter imputed to him, he proved himself to be eminently open to reason, for, having heard the evidence, he concurred in a verdict of guilty against Captain Rye.

Is this man the Collins who wrote the letter; and, if so, why did not the Crown Solicitor instruct him to stand by, seeing that more than 30 challenges were made by the Crown?

I have already said that I have been unable to obtain the information.

Was it not the duty of the Crown Solicitor to prevent this man from serving on the jury?

Certainly it was, if the facts are true, but the fact I have been unable to find out is that he is the man who wrote the letter. Beyond all doubt if he had expressed an opinion one way or the other he ought not to have been on the jury.

If I put a question on Monday will the right hon. Gentleman have sufficient opportunity to enable him to ascertain in the meantime if this was the same person?

I have no means of ascertaining.

Is it not the fact that Captain Rye was charged with firing at and unlawfully wounding Corcoran, and that he was only tried for a common assault?

At the request of the Secretary of State for War I beg to postpone a question I intended to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been called to the report in the Newry Reporter of 26th June, 1890, of an action for trespass against Captain Irwin, of the East Lancashire Regiment, brought before the County Court Judge of Down at the last sitting of the County Court at Newry, from which it appears that, on the 15th July, 1889, Captain Irwin and about 60 men of his regiment were going through a "night attack," in the course of which a number of his men trespassed on the lands of Mr. James Goodman, of Cloghmore, and did damage to his crops; whether he has observed that it appeared in evidence that, when Mr. Goodman protested against the trespass on his crops, one of the soldiers pointed a revolver at him and threatened to shoot him; whether Mr. Goodman offered to leave to arbitration the amount of loss sustained by him; whether Colonel Griffiths, on 14th August last, in answer to a letter of Mr. T. J. Marron, Solicitor for Mr. Goodman, referred Mr. Marron to Captain Irwin as "the officer who was in sole command, and who was solely responsible for any occurrence connected with his party on that night;" whether, at the trial, advantage was taken of the fact that the trespassers were under the immediate command of the colour-sergeant, and that the proper defendant was not before the Court and whether the Judge is correctly reported to have said "he believed damage had been done by the military, but he could not hold Captain Irwin liable," and he dismissed the case; "and whether he will cause inquiry to be made into the matter, and see that fair compensation be given to Mr. Goodman for the damage done to his property by the soldiers on that occasion.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is intended to supply the Royal Irish Rifles with the new pattern head-dress, which has been served to the Rifle Brigade and to the 60th Rifles, in place of helmets?

The whole question of the head-dress for Rifle Regiments is now under consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the district of Tralee, County Kerry, four stabs were inflicted on a donkey belonging to Thomas Grogan, on an evicted farm; if so, whether any one has been made amenable for the outrage?

The Constabulary Authorities report that it is the case that in the district of Tralee a donkey which was grazing on an evicted farm was found on the 22nd instant to be stabbed in four places. No person appears to have been so far made amenable for this cowardly and cruel outrage.

Has it been brought to the knowledge of the right hon. Gentleman that the punctures were such as might have been made by a Constabulary bayonet?

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the owner of a racehorse stabbed his own animal and then obtained 100 guineas from the Grand Jury?

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether ho is aware that Francis C. Garvey, of Murrisk Abbey, Mayo, Ireland, who was appointed clerk of Petty Sessions for Louisburgh district by the Justices of said district, and also recently appointed Commissioner for taking affidavits by the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland, was dismissed his ship and the Service, he being then an officer in the Royal Navy, on a charge of larceny, and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment; and whether, in the face of the above-mentioned finding, he will be continued in the position of trust and emolument to which he has been appointed?

I must ask the hon. Gentleman to defer the question until some day next week. The Registrar of Petty Sessions clerks is making inquiries.

The matter is one of very great importance, and I ask that an answer shall be vouchsafed at the earliest possible opportunity. I will put the question down again for Monday and shall expect an answer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, considering that the Law in England allows every person convicted by summary jurisdiction, and sentenced to imprisonment without the option of a fine, the right of appeal to a superior Court, whilst the law in Ireland denies such appeal except when the term of imprisonment exceeds one month, the Government will take any step to modify the system by which Magistrates in Ire- land are able to refuse to increase sentences of one month and under, and so withhold from persons summarily convicted in Ireland the right of review by a superior Court enjoyed in every case as a matter of legal right in England? I wish to explain that the question has been fundamentally altered since I handed it in, and that I did not refer to the ordinary Justices at all.

I can only answer the question as it appears on the Paper. The difference between the two countries depends on the terms of the Petty Sessions Act, 1851, which govern all summary jurisdiction. It is impossible without legislation to modify the system, and legislation, even if desirable in the abstract, is obviously impossible in existing circumstances.

Will the right hon. Gentleman introduce a non-contentious Bill to assimilate the law of the two countries; and, if not, will he lay on the Table of the House a declaration that it is expedient to give the same right of appeal to prisoners sentenced in Ireland as that which is now enjoyed by prisoners sentenced in England? The right hon. Gentleman must remember that he promised an appeal in all cases.

I deny that, either in public or private, I ever intimated any intention of interfering with the Magistrates in the exercise of their judicial functions.

You did.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bring in a Bill to assimilate the law of Ireland to that of England in respect of the right of appeal?

It would be obviously absurd to undertake to introduce this Session a Bill to make so important a change in the law.

Will the right hon. Gentleman introduce a Bill next Session?

I can make no promise of the kind.

I bog to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any Memorial has reached his Department from fishermen of Crombane, Killorglin, County Kerry, whose industry has been affected at the most favourable fishing season by the fact that the confluence of the three rivers in which they trawl salmon is in the line of fire of the Artillery range at Rossbeigh; whether the names of such men, who have (after paying for their £3 licences) been hampered in their industry, have been forwarded to the War Office; and will their representation be favourably considered?

Memorials have been received from seven fishermen of Rossbeigh and Crombane asking for compensation for losses in salmon fishing consequent on Artillery practice at Glenbeigh. The Chief Crown Solicitor in Ireland reports that on completion of the Bye Laws for the Artillery Range at Glenbeigh, the question of the rights of the fishermen will have to be considered; and as the petitioners' claims to compensation for disturbance in the pursuit of their industry depend upon their possession of such rights, the matter must be left in the Crown Solicitor's hands for further report. The Irish Fishery Department have also offered to hold a local inquiry into the case.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can now state what decision the Irish Land Commissioners have come to with regard to the explanation given by Mr. Percy Magan, J.P., to the charge of having obtained money under the Arrears Act by false representations; whether he will lay the explanation before the House; and, whether, the Land Commission showing by their demand for an explanation that a prima facie case had been made out, he still declines to take any steps to direct the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the case, with the view of having Magan suspended from the discharge of magisterial functions pending a full inquiry.

The Land Commissioners report that they have considered the charges made by the hon. Member, and Mr. Magan's reply thereto, and that they intend to forward a Report in the matter to the Lord Lieutenant. The Executive Government now await the receipt of that Report.

As a primd facie case has been established, will not the Government in the meantime suspend Mr. Magan?

As the Law Officers of the Crown have not yet seen the Report, the hon. Member will see that they cannot take any action in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the County Leitrim estate of Mr. William R. La Touche, Bellevue, Wick-low, originating notices have been served as far back as October, 1887, which have not yet been heard by the Land Sub-Commission; whether he is aware that it is proposed to sell the estate under a mortgage; and, whether, in view of the fact that under such circumstances it is very undesirable that the rent should remain undecided, he is in a position to state the date for the next sitting of the Sub-Commission in Carrick-on-Shannon.

The Land Commissioners report that there are only five cases outstanding on the estate referred to. They were all received subsequently to October, 1887. An application has been made to the Land Commission to purchase this estate, which is for sale in the Land Judge's Court, with a view to re-sale of the same to the tenants. Three of these cases, which are in the Poor Law Union of Bawnboy, will probably appear in the Ballyconnell October list. No arrangements have yet been made for a Sub-Commission sitting for the Union of Carrick-on-Shannon.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction among the farmers of the Counties of Down and Antrim, who have upwards of two years ago served notices to have fair rents fixed, and who, pending the hearing of their applications, are now obliged to pay the old rack rents; whether the Sub-Commissioners appointed for Down and Antrim were some time ago taken away from their work there, and sent to another part of Ireland; whether anything has been since done in these counties to give to the tenants the benefits conferred upon them by the Land Acts; and, whether, considering the inability of the tenants to pay the old rents, and the number of ejectment decrees already obtained against them, he will give directions to have the Sub-Commissioners sent back to these counties without delay?

The Land Commissioners report that all applications to fix fair rents in the Counties of Down and Antrim have been disposed of up to the end of the year 1887. In April last the Commissioners found it necessary to move the Sub-Commission which had been working in the counties in question to the Counties of Mayo and Sligo, in order that the undisposed of cases in those districts might be brought up to a level date. According to the present arrangements a Sub-Commission will commence the hearing of the cases from the Counties of Down and Antrim on the 7th of October next. In the case of any tenant proceeded against for the old rent, it is open to him to apply to the Court for a stay of execution or other order as to the Court may seem fit, and where the tenant pays at the old rate he is entitled to make a future deduction for the difference between such payment and any reduced rate at which the judicial rent may be fixed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether a Member of this House was not permitted to have an interview with James Egan, a prisoner in the Convict Prison at Chatham, except in the presence and hearing of a warder, although such interview was granted at the convict's own request, whereas agents for the Times, and detectives in the service of the Times, were permitted to hold interviews with convicts both in Chatham Prison and other prisons in England, such interviews being unsolicited by the convicts, and held on some occasions in the presence, but not in the hearing, of a warder, and on other occasions out of the presence and hearing of a warder; and on what ground is the distinction of treatment of a Times agent and detective and the treatment of a Member of this House maintained?

I also beg to ask the right hon. Genitleman, with reference to the case of Egan, whether he is aware that the warder in charge of the prisoner told the hon. Member for South Wexford, during his visit to Egan on Monday last, that "he (the warder) had received special instructions not to permit the slightest reference to the treatment of the prisoner," and by whom such special instructions were given; whether Egan solemnly protested that "it was a matter of life and death to him" to be allowed to refer to it; whether he is aware that the friends of the prisoner apprehend the most grave circumstances unless he allows a visit by some independent person in whom the prisoner will have confidence; and whether, considering the peculiar circumstances, he will now allow such a visit?

The interview with James Egan, at Chatham, alluded to in the question, was subject to the practice which governs all ordinary visits, namely, that they take place in the presence and hearing of a prison officer. I am not aware of any exception having been made to this rule. Visits by solicitors on business are special visits. They are allowed to take place before conviction in the sight, but not in the hearing, of an officer; and in local prisons the Commissioners have, in their discretion, allowed similar visits after conviction. The visits of Mr. Soames to convicted prisoners at Chatham took place in the sight and hearing of the Deputy Governor. His agents saw some prisoners in a local prison in the sight, but out of the hearing, of the prison officers. I am not aware of any such visit having been held out of the sight of a prison officer. I have more than once explained in this House that a distinction is made by the Prison Authorities between ordinary visits and visits by solicitors on business, and this is the sole cause of the difference alluded to by the hon. Member. No special instructions were, so far as I know, given to the warder in charge of the prisoner with reference to the visit of the hon. Member for South Wexford. The general instructions given to all visitors are that reference to prison treatment is not allowed. Any complaint by a prisoner of his prison treatment should be addressed, not to an outside visitor, but to the Governor, or to the Prison Directors, or to the Secretary of State, or to the Visitors of the prison, who are perfectly independent, and who, a short time ago, made a special inquiry covering Egan's treatment. I have requested the Visiting Director to make immediate inquiry from Egan personally as to his complaints.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. Member for South Wexford (Mr. J. Barry) sought to obtain from the prisoner in question a statement as to the treatment he received, but that the warder interrupted him, stating that he had received special instructions not to permit the slightest reference to the matter; that Egan then protested that it was a matter of life and death to him, and seemed greatly distressed, pressing his hand to his head. In view of the peculiar circumstances of this case, will the right hon. Gentleman consent to allow some person quite independent of the prison, not necessarily a Member of the House, but someone in whose discretion the right hon. Gentleman himself would have confidence, to have a private interview with the prisoner, and represent to the right hon. Gentleman the result of the interview, so that the impression which exists in the public mind regarding Egan's treatment may be removed?

I must remind the hon. Gentleman that only a short while ago a special inquiry was made into the prison treatment at Chatham, and with the result with which the hon. Member is, no doubt, acquainted. Inquiry will, however, be made into this subject, and if I find there is any difficulty in getting a full statement from Egan of his complaint, I will request some one not connected with the Service to hold an inquiry. But I must point out that it would be destructive to prison discipline if Members of Parliament or other persons outside were to make a claim to investigate these cases.

In the case of prisoners in Scotland, has it not been decided that they are entitled to additional letters in consequence of the difficulty of seeing them.

In a matter of detail of that kind it would be better to put a question on the Paper.

I may remind the right hon. Gentleman that I have already put a question on the subject, and that he promised to make inquiry. I now ask him what the result of the inquiry is?

I do not remember the circumstance. If the hon. Member desires to have a correct answer, he had better put a question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attendance in the Shelbourne National School, Kenmare, the class of the principal teacher, and the condition of the school, warrant the appointment of two monitors; whether he is aware that Julia O'Sullivan, sister to the principal teacher, recently passed successfully the required examination for monitress, but was rejected merely because, owing to the illness of the local Registrar, a certificate of her age was not forwarded within six days; and what has been the average daily attendance for past year and for past quarter in said school, and what is its present teaching staff?

The Commissioners of National Education report that the appointment of two monitors is not warranted. The condition of the school has not been satisfactory. Within a period of little over three years the teacher had to be twice reprimanded, once cautioned, and once admonished. The previous monitor, moreover, failed badly in his fourth year's examination. The application was refused for the foregoing reason, and because no recommendation was received from the Inspector, who stated he was doubtful as to the advisability of the appointment, and he thought it would be well to postpone the question until next year to afford time for a further observation of the working of the school. The last recorded annual average—that for the year 1889—was 71·6; the average for last quarter was 86. The staff of the school at present consists of a principal and an assistant teacher.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General to what decision he has come with respect to the representations and suggestions lately made to him for acceleration of the mail services by the Larne and Stranraer route; is the right hon. Gentleman aware that letters were received only to-day, too late for delivery?

I have received no information to that effect, and shall be sorry to find that it has been so. In reply to the question on the Paper I have to say that the Railway Companies concerned have not yet furnished me with a statement showing definitely the terms on which they would be prepared to provide a greatly accelerated service via Stranraer and Larne. I am, therefore, not yet in a position to come to any decision in the matter; but, meanwhile, I have ordered Returns of correspondence to be taken, with a view to determine what expenditure, if any, might properly be incurred for the establishment of the service desired.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether complaints have reached him that the furniture supplied to the National Library in Dublin is of an inferior and unsuitable class; and whether directions will be given that the furniture shall be in keeping with the panelling, doors, and other woodwork fittings of the interior?

I have not heard any complaint so far, but I will communicate the question of the hon. Gentleman to the Board of Words.

I trust I may be allowed to express a hope that this important National institution will not be furnished like a waiting-room at a railway station.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is true that ex-constable Palmer was interviewed and recognised by the detective police at Queenstown on the steamship Arizona when escaping from justice; and whether any attempt to effect his extradition will be made by the Dublin Castle Authorities?

The Constabulary Authorities report that they have grounds for believing that the ex-constable when on board the steamship was spoken to by the detectives, but that it is not true that they recognised him. The man gave his name as "Joseph Pears." The police did not observe anything to suggest suspicion. The offence is not one to which extradition applies.

Did not a man see him on board the Arizona who had been in the Force with him for six months?

That is a matter of fact of which I must have notice.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that Michael Morissey is now nearly five months in prison for contempt in disobeying an order which he could not legally obey, he will recommend his immediate release?

As I have already stated, the Government have no title to interfere with the discretion of a Judge in a case where he has made a committal for contempt of Court.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the sanitary condition of Derry Prison, if it is true, as stated in the Report of Major Beamish, that the "soil pipes of the prison are deficient of disconnecting traps and air inlets" at the point where they join the soil drains of the prison?

With regard to the point in Major Beamish's Report as to the condition of the soil pipes in Derry Prison, the General Prisons Board refer to their statements in paragraphs 3 and 4 of page 8 of that Report. Since that Report the ventilating pipe recommended in connection with the public sewer of the town has been erected by the Corporation, and the new medical member of the Board has also visited the prison, and is clearly in accord with the former expressed opinion of the Board as to the satisfactory condition of the drainage of this prison The Board further add there is in this prison a system in full operation for the complete and frequent flushing of the drains, which is found to be most effective.

I think the right hon. Gentleman does not understand that the town drainage in no way affects these traps. Will he make further inquiry?

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question. Yes or no?

Has the right hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs any information to give with regard to Buenos Ayres?

This telegram arrived to-day, dated 7 o'clock last evening:—"Everything settled; town quiet; street traffic resumed."

Is there any information from San Salvador and Guatemala.

No, Sir, nothing yet.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the stranding of the fishing boat Missionary, of Stornoway, in Wick Bay, and to the ineffectual efforts made by the crew of another boat, named Orient, to get her afloat, that during those efforts the gunboat Jackal lay quietly at anchor, while her commander, owing to the want of steam, could not offer any effectual assistance beyond sending a small boat to the stranded craft; whether it is not the duty of the commander of the Jackal to have sufficient steam continuously in his ship's boilers to enable him at any moment to weigh anchor and render assistance to disabled fishing boats; and whether the noble Lord is prepared to substitute for so antiquated a vessel as the Jackal one of more modern construction?

It is an error to suppose that it is the business of Her Majesty's war-ships to keep up steam for the purpose of assisting fishing boats in distress. Their duty consists in protect- ing fishermen, or in seeing that foreign fishermen do not interfere with them.

Then are we to understand that it is not the duty of the officer in charge of a vessel appointed to look after the fisheries to render a boat assistance when it is in difficulties?

No doubt assistance should be given in such cases, but that is not the object with which a vessel is sent on duty.

I shall refer to the matter on the Estimates.

Some 10 days ago I was asked a question, which I was not then able to answer, with respect to the six Guardsmen recently tried by Court Martial and sentenced to terms of imprisonment. I hope the House will now allow me to answer it. In the interests of the men themselves, I hope that no attempt will be made, either in this House or by means of any public meeting, to put any pressure on the War Office in this matter, because it will be clear to the House that any sympathy shown or suggested with a gross breach of discipline will at once aggravate its importance and its danger. I think, however, that there will be a general feeling that the sentences passed upon these men were in themselves severe. The time has not yet arrived to decide this question, but I have requested the Commander-in-Chief, and he has readily undertaken to examine the cases of these men, including their subsequent behaviour in prison, with the view of considering whether, with due regard to the requirements of military discipline, any remission of the sentences could be granted.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury a question, of which I have given him private notice—whether there are any Papers in the Foreign Office relating to the Mission of Sir G. Errington to the Vatican, under the auspices of the right hon. Member for Mid Lothian, and, if there are any Papers, whether they will be laid before Parliament?

I have only received notice of the question after entering the House. The hon. Member will therefore see that it was not possible for me to communicate with the Foreign Secretary since then. If the hon. Gentleman will put a question on the Paper for Monday, I will inquire whether there are any Papers which could be produced.

I have not received any notice of this question, and, considering that it is quite obvious at whom the question is aimed, I think, in point of decency and Parliamentary usage, the hon. Member might perhaps have given me notice of it. There has never been anything, so far as I know, in the nature of a mission to the Vatican under any Government with which I have been connected, or any other Government, but there were, and have been at various times, undoubtedly, communications held so far back as the time of Lord Palmerston and in the Pontificate of Gregory XVI.—communications held by persons holding some office in Italy for the purpose of conducting any correspondence that it was thought fit to establish. There are many cases to be made known, and a variety of them might, I should suppose, from the annals of the Foreign Office, be specified, and an account laid before this House, which I think would not be an undesirable mode of giving information to the country upon a question of great interest. As far as I remember, the persons who were principally concerned—at all events, some of the persons who were concerned —were a diplomatist who belonged to the family of the Seymours in the time of Lord Palmerston, and in the Pontificate of Gregory XVI., after that the very well-known and highly-esteemed diplomatist Lord Odo Russell, and the last of these was the case of Sir G. Errington in the Government with which I was connected. He bore no diplomatic character whatever, but he undoubtedly conveyed and received information. As far as I am aware, the essential distinction between those cases and the case of Sir Lintorn Simmons was this— that no gentleman who carried on these correspondences on any occasion had any power whatever to commit Her Majesty's Government upon any subject, or claimed any power to receive requests or demands from the Vatican, and to accede to those requests and demands. But I am quite of opinion that, as the right hon. Gentleman is going to inquire into the matter, it would be well that the inquiry should hardly he limited within the bounds of an answer to question. The subject is of great importance. Much attention has justly been drawn to it in consequence of recent circumstances, and I should think that the preparation of a careful Memorandum in the Foreign Office, illustrated by all documents which are available, and which can be properly produced, would tend to put the House and the country in full possession of matters of which, undoubtedly, they are but partially informed, and which are of great importance to the country. I may state this, with regard to the Mission of Sir G. Errington—which I should not be at all sorry to see brought under discussion in this House, when I could express my sentiments about it—that, as far as I am aware, the Mission of Sir G. Errington, was really not so much a Mission as the taking advantage of Sir G. Errington's residence in Rome to correspond with the Foreign Office and to make known his views. As far as I know, the case of Sir G. Errington differed from all cases which preceded it in this, that it was constantly made the subject of questions and explanations in this House, and to the best of my memory in all the previous cases hardly any notice was given to the matter.

I will take care to communicate to my noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Office the suggestion which the right hon. Gentleman has thrown out—that a careful narrative Report, by the documents which may be in existence, should be prepared for the information of the House. The suggestion will be carefully considered by the Government. It would be better now to refrain from any argument or any statement with regard to the character of the Representative of this country at the Vatican, either under a former Government or this Government.

I beg to give notice that I shall repeat the question on Monday.

I desire to add that in giving an answer on the moment to the notice of the hon. Gentle- man behind me, I must not be taken to have purported to give a complete or historical narrative. I stated all that was within my recollection, and I rather think that what I have stated will be found to be correct so far as it goes, although doubtless it may admit of amplification.

I desire to ask the First Lord of the Treasury a question, of which I have given private notice, with regard to the speech last night of the right hon. Member for Mid Lothian, in which the following passage occurred—

"The Pope was induced about 18 months ago, I think, to fulminate what was called a rescript against the Nationalists of Ireland. Ho thereby, in my opinion, at great cost to his own influence within the legitimate sphere of purely spiritual authority—at very great cost, damage, and detriment to himself—undoubtedly did his utmost to prop up a labouring and failing cause, namely, that of the anti-Irish Party in this country. That was a great step on the part of the Pope. Did it not demand a return? You have got the return before you. The return is by sending somebody whom you call an Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the Pope."

I wish to ask whether there is any foundation whatever for the insinuation that the late Mission of Sir Lintorn Simmons was the consequence of the action of the Pope in publishing a rescript condemning the un-Christian practices of boycotting, intimidation, and the Plan of Campaign?

Order, order ! The hon. Gentleman must be aware that this is a question which a Minister cannot be expected to answer in that form.

I wish to ask as to the order of business. Will the Report of the Local Taxation Bill be the first order of the day to-morrow; next, is the House to sit on Saturday; and lastly, as this is the 31st July, and there are ill-omened rumours of our meeting in November, will the right hon. Gentleman state what Bills will be proceeded with?

I understand from my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that it will be for the convenience of the House that the Report of the Local Taxation Bill shall be taken to-morrow if the Com- mittee is concluded to-day, and if that is the view of the House the Government will be very glad to take the Rpeort tomorrow, substantially as the first order. They then propose, if a sufficient interval can be found, to take the Post Office Vote, which it is desirable should be obtained. The Police Bill will be taken as soon as the Report of the Local Taxation Bill shall be completed, whether on Saturday or Monday. I have received intimations from different parts of the House that it will be for the general convenience that the House shall meet on Saturday, the sitting being subject to Wednesday rules—that is, that the business shall practically be suspended at half-past 5 o'clock. The Bills which the Government intend to proceed with are the Local Taxation Bill, the Police Bill, the Census (Ireland) Bill, London County Council (Money) Bill, Public Works Loans Bill, and the Savings Banks Bill, if it is not opposed.

It will be opposed to the end.

Then, with reference to that intimation, I can only deeply deplore there should be opposition of the kind declared to a Bill which, I believe, is regarded by the vast majority of Members, even on the hon. Member's own side, as embodying a great safeguard to investors in Savings Banks. On the hon. Member must rest the responsibility if the Bill is not passed. The Partnership Bill, a purely Legal Bill, I believe has been accepted by the House without question. The Public Health Acts Amendment Bill the Government desire to proceed with, and, of course, the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill must be passed. As to the Employers' Liability for Injuries to Workmen Bill and the Reformatory Schools Bill, the order will be discharged. The Electoral Disabilities (Naval, Military, and Police) Bill I hope to pass, on the understanding that Ireland will be exempted from the scope of its operation. With this statement I hope I may appeal to hon. Members to give the Government their assistance in making material progress with the business of the remainder of the week.