I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can obtain from Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople any information respecting the delay in granting a firman to the English Episcopal Church at Nablus, which was erected in 1881, and opened for service in 1882; and whether he will instruct Her Majesty's Ambassador to use his friendly offices with the Ottoman Government to procure the issuing of the firman?

Her Majesty's Ambassador is using his friendly offices with the Ottoman Government.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he will kindly state the number of persons who have purchased, in the Post Office Savings Bank, Deferred Annuities, payable after the age of 60; and what is the average amount of such annuities?

The total number of Deferred Annuities payable after the age of 60 which have been purchased through the Post Office Savings Bank is 568, and the average amount of these Annuities is £18 1s. 2d.

Is that from the commencement of the granting of such Annuities?

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Council whether scholars attending evening classes, and who are also in the obligatory standards of an elementary day school, are in a position to receive any assistance from the County Council in respect of any manual or technical instruction given at the evening school?

No scholar over 14 is, as a rule, recognised on the registers of a day school, and no scholar under 14 can be recognised in an evening school unless he is deemed by the Department to be exempt from the legal obligation to attend school, so that it is practically impossible for any child to occupy the dual position indicated in my hon. Friend's question. It appears, however, that scholars who having passed the Fifth Standard no longer receive instruction in the obligatory subjects are, if qualified to attend an evening school, eligible to receive assistance from the County Council in respect of manual or technical instruction.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education if he can state the total numbers of male and female scholars and of male and female teachers in the State-aided schools under the inspection of Her Majesty's Inspectors in the United Kingdom, at the latest date to which statistics have been supplied?

The latest published figures for England and Wales will be found on pages 239 and 242 of the last General Report laid on the Table, but the Returns for 1890 are almost ready, and will shortly be in the hands of Members.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War the decision as to the Petition of certain labourers in Woolwich Arsenal for increase of wages on account of heavy rents in London?

The position of the labourers employed under the War Office was fully considered by the Government at the same time as that of those employed in the Dockyards. We came to the conclusion that no general case was made out for increasing the pay of labourers in the Ordnance Factories. But as regards the unskilled labourers in the employment of the Army Ordnance Store Department, we propose to follow generally at Woolwich, Portsmouth, Devonport, and Chatham the lines recently announced in the Circular from the Admiralty.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the illegal shipment of incompetent seamen as A.B.'s at the port of Cardiff, as appears from the statement of R. Phillips and others, reported in the South Wales Daily News of 25th February, and also by the statement taken from the said R. Phillips and others by the Superintendent of Mercantile Marine at Cardiff; if he is aware of the fact that the men referred to, although incompetent and inexperienced, were signed on as A.B.'s in the presence of an official of the Board of Trade; whether, to prevent incompetent men from being signed on in future, the Board of Trade will cause instructions to be given that no man shall be signed on a ship's articles as an able-bodied seaman unless he is able to comply with "The Merchant Seamen (Payment of Wages and Rating) Act, 1880," sec. 7; if he is aware that the men so signed on as A.B.'s were brought to the ship by a person who is not licensed to ship seamen in accordance with sec. 147, sub-sec. (1), of "The Merchant Shipping Act, 1854;" and, if these statements are true, what steps he proposes to take with regard to the official who has, in two separate instances, allowed the Acts which he is appointed to administer to be infringed?

Yes, Sir; my attention has been directed to the cases to which the right hon. Gentleman refers, but I am not in a position to give a categorical reply until I have received the Report of the Cardiff Local Marine Board, who have made an inquiry with regard to all the circumstances. I may, however, add that it has always been held at the Board of Trade that there is nothing in Section 7 of the Merchant Shipping (Payment of Wages and Rating) Act, 1880, which confers power upon a Superintendent to refuse to allow a man to sign on as an A.B. without production of a certificate or certificates mentioned in that section. This view of the section is borne out by the following paragraph in the Final Report of the Loss of Life at Sea Commission, 1884:—

"With respect to the rating of 'Able Seamen,' it is now the law that no man is entitled to he go rated unless he can prove four years' service at sea before the mast. There is, however, great laxity in this respect. Men are constantly rated as 'A.B.' without any inquiry as to their past services and with insufficient qualification: practically it rests with the masters of vessels whether to rate them as such or not. Nor does it appear to us that there is any certain method by which this can be prevented."

When will the right hon. Gentleman be ready to give an answer to the other part of the question, which refers to the action of the Department?

I cannot say at present. If the right hon. Gentleman will defer the question for a week I think I shall be able to answer it.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if the Post Office has the right, after determining the number of words in a telegram and securing prepayment, to demand a further payment if, through the inefficiency of their servants, they discover an increased charge should have been made by reason of more words being in the message than were counted at the time; and, if they have the right, will he give directions that the sender shall have the original message shown him, and in the case of long messages of several hundred words be allowed every facility to examine such messages?

The payment for a Press telegram is determined by Act of Parliament, and no servant of the Post Office, whether efficient or inefficient, has power to vary the charge. It has been decided in the High Court of Justice that where an insufficient payment has been made at the counter in the first instance, the sender of a message is afterwards liable for the balance of the charge. The fullest facilities are afforded to senders to re-count their messages if they have any doubt as to the correctness of a claim for further payment. If the hon. Member has in his mind any case where these have not been allowed, and will communicate the circumstances to me, I will direct inquiry to be made.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the recent decision of the Chamber of Deputies in Franco, which has decided to suppress every kind of public betting at race meetings, and even the Paris mutual bookmakers are to be interdicted; and whether the Government will take in to consideration the expediency of proposing similar legislation for this country?

I collect from the newspapers that the French Chambers have rejected a Bill by which the Government proposed to legalise what is called the pari mutuel, and to levy a considerable tax on that form of betting. I also collect that M. Constans announced that if this Bill were rejected he would go to the opposite extreme, and would prosecute those who practised that form of gambling; but this decision does not appear to be final. The Government do not intend to propose any legislation on this subject.

I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that the Government proposed to legalise the pari mutuel. Is it at present optional?

I do not gather that the Government proposed to legalise it, but to impose a tax upon it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any proclamation has been issued by the Military Commanders at Suakin as to the intentions of the Egyptian Government towards the tribes; whether any terms have been made with the tribes in the neighbourhood of Suakin and Tokar, for the purposes of common action against the approach of hostile forces from Kassala; and whether, at the fall of Afafite and Tokar, any prisoners were captured; and, if so, in what way they have been disposed of?

Since the right hon. Gentleman gave notice of this question inquiry has been made by telegraph, but as yet the Egyptian Government have no information on the subjects mentioned.

Can the right hon. Gentleman answer the third question?

That, also, the Government are at present unable to answer.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that on a recent occasion the Royal Mail Company's vessel Don, conveying mails from South America and the West Indies to the United Kingdom (under contract as far as the West Indies are concerned with the Post Office), was detained 36 hours at Jamaica, in order that certain of the passengers might take part in a State ceremony; and that for a matter of fact the mails by this steamer reached Plymouth two days behind the contract time; who was responsible for this detention; and whether, as these mail steamers touch at several West Indian Islands, he would arrange that they should proceed on their voyages without any further delay than is entailed by the receiving or discharging of cargo or of coaling? I wish to substitute for the Don the Orinoko.

I can only answer accurately the question as it appears on the Paper. The mail steamer in question was detained at Jamaica, not for 36 hours, but for 20½ hours, on the 27th of January, by order of the Governor, on the occasion of the opening of the Jamaica Exhibition; and although such action is certainly to be deprecated generally, I think this occasion was sufficiently exceptional to warrant it. I believe the course taken has met with general approval in the West Indies and at home. The steamer arrived at Plymouth 36 hours late, but the additional delay was caused by bad weather encountered on the voyage home.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that the rate of postage from Barbados to Jamaica is 4d. per. ounce, whilst from either of these West Indian Islands to the United Kingdom, the United States, or South America the rate is only 2½d. per ounce; and if it is in any way practicable to reduce the postal rates charged by the various West Indian Islands, especially as between them selves?

The reduction of post-ago recently made on letters between the United Kingdom and the British Colonies did not extend to letters sent intercolonially, as between Barbados and Jamaica, and, consequently, wherever the intercolonial postage was 4d., it remains so for the present. To extend the 2½d. postage further of course would involve further loss of Postage Revenue; but I hope to be able before long to submit proposals to the Treasury for applying the reduced letter postage to all parts of the British Possessions.

I beg further to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the mail steamer from Barbados to the United Kingdom is timed to start two days before the outward mail steamer arrives; and whether, if that is so, it would be possible to arrange that the mail from the United Kindgom should arrive two days prior to the departure of the mail from Barbados to Europe?

The time table for the West India Mail Service is arranged so as to afford the greatest amount of postal accommodation between this country and the colonies. The mails homeward are timed to reach this country on one Wednesday and to leave this country outward on the following Wednesday thus leaving a week's interval here for replies. This happens to involve, as my hon. Friend points out, an arrival of an English mail at Barbados two days after the homeward mail from Barbados to England has started; but I have not received any complaint from that Island on this point. In any case, I do not see that a re-arrangement of the service for the advantage of Barbados could be made without detriment to the more important communication between the West Indies generally and this country.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether there is any reason why the Blue Books and other Parliamentary Papers should not be posted to the residences of Members who reside out of London, as well as the Votes and Orders of the Day, without charge to the Members?

No charge for postage is made to Members upon Parliamentary Papers which are officially despatched from the Vote Office or Sale Office, and hon. Members can arrange with either of those Offices for the transmission of such Papers as they may wish to have forwarded to them when out of London.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if Papers other than the Votes are sent on additional postage is charged?

The Post Office does not authorise a charge for any Papers sent officially through the Post Office.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has any objection to lay upon the Table and to circulate for general information a memorandum of the data and reasons upon which the Inflammable Liquids Bill is founded?

If the hon. Member desires a memorandum I shall be happy to supply it.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether it is intended to lay the Report of the Intra-departmental Committee on the Importation of Live Cattle into the United Kingdom from Canada and the United States upon the Table of the House; and, if so, when it is likely to be presented?

Yes; the Report of the Committee in question will be laid upon the Table, and I hope it will be ready shortly after Easter.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any recent information as to the condition of Crete, and as to the correctness of the report that disturbances have again broken out in that Island, and that, among other cases of outrage, two lads have been lately murdered and mutilated by Zaptiehs?

Papers will shortly be presented which will include the Reports of the British Consul on the state of the Island. It cannot be said that disturbances have again broken out, but frequent murders take place both of Christians and of Mussulmans. Some of these crimes are attributed to gendarmes. One of these cases was that of a Christian lad of 18, who was recently found murdered with circumstances of great atrocity.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government have any ground for believing that Moussa Bey is to be tried on any of the charges still pending against him; whether there is any prospect of his being exiled to Medina or elsewhere; and whether he is at present at Constantinople in actual or nominal confinement, or has been permitted to return to Armenia?

According to the Turkish Papers, Moussa Bey was sent under police escort to Medina on the 19th of October last.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it be the fact that, although, according to Consul Lloyd's Minute of 2nd October, 1890, many Christians were "detained in prison for long periods without any charge being made against them" in connection with the disturbances at Erzeroum upon 20th June, no prosecution has been instituted by the Turkish Government, in spite of the repeated representations of the British and French Representatives at Constantinople and promises of the Grand Vizier, against any Mahommedans for the murder and pillage of Christians upon that day; and whether, if this be so, Her Majesty's Ambassador will be instructed to press upon the Porte the fulfilment of these promises, in order to afford greater confidence and security to the Christians of Erzeroum and the surrounding country?

No prosecution has, so far as we know, been instituted. Inquiry will be made as to what stops the Porte proposes to take in the matter.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is a fact that Sir William White has received a Petition from the Christian inhabitants of Zeitoun, in Armenia, which contains the allegation that 400 children have died from the effects of poison intentionally introduced into the system when they were vaccinated by a doctor acting under the orders and direction of the Turkish Governor, Salih Pasha?

No such Petition has, so far as we know, been received by Sir William White, but a letter was addressed to Her Majesty's Consul at Aleppo on October 21 last containing the incredible statement that 400 children had been vaccinated with intentionally poisoned lymph by a doctor sent by the Governor for the purpose, and had died in consequence. As I have already stated, Sir William White has taken steps to inquire into the truth of the varying statements that have been made respecting occurrences at Zeitoun.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to a statement publicly made in several newspapers, that in September last, at Tranby Croft, Field Marshal H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, Lieutenant General Owen Williams, and Lieutenant Levett, were informed that Lieutenant Colonel Sir William Gordon-Cumming had cheated at a game of cards, and thereupon the three officers and others signed a paper agreeing to preserve silence as to the accusation, provided that Sir William Gordon-Cumming pledged his word never again to play at cards; whether the three other officers in question were guilty of an offence against the Army Regulations in signing a paper agreeing to preserve silence with respect to such an accusation; and whether it is intended to hold any Court of Inquiry into the conduct of the officers concerned?

I have seen the statement referred to, and I am given to understand that it will shortly be the subject of a civil action; and I must therefore, in common fairness to all parties concerned, respectfully decline to make any observations whatever upon the case.

Am I, then, to understand that whenever circumstances which may have involved a breach of the Army Regulations are to be brought before the ordinary Courts of Law, the consideration of the question as to the breach of the regulations is to be postponed?

The hon. Member is only to understand what I said.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the Khedive of Egypt has abandoned the Soudan, but has not abandoned his "rights of sovereignty" over it, the inhabitants of that country are deemed rebels to their Sovereign by Her Majesty's Government; whether the de facto Government of that country is recognised by Her Majesty's Government; whether the sovereignty of the Soudan, claimed by the Khedive, is recognised by his Suzerain, the Sultan, since the Khedive officially announced that "he abandoned the country;" whether the rights of sovereignty claimed by the Khedive extends to Kassala and to Khartoum, and what are the geo- graphical limits of the territory called the Soudan over which they are claimed; whether they are the same as those possessed by the Khedive Ismael; whether, when the Khedive "abandoned the Soudan," any places, except Massowah and Suakin, were excepted from that abandonment; whether he is aware of any official document, either published by Her Majesty's Government or by the Government of the Khedive, by which, either directly or indirectly, that part of the Soudan called Tokar was excepted from the general declaration of abandonment; whether any portions of the Soudanese littoral, except Massowah and Suakin, were excepted from the abandonment; whether, directly or indirectly, Her Majesty's Government has given any assurance that it would defend or maintain Egyptian authority in any territory beyond Egypt and Suakin; whether Her Majesty's Government has called the attention of the Egyptian Government to the fact that the military occupation of Tokar by a portion of the Egyptian Army throws increased responsibility and risk upon the British garrison in Egypt in maintaining order, and whether it is intended to call upon the Egyptian Government to make any increased payment to Her Majesty's Government in consideration of this increased responsibility and risk; whether Her Majesty's Government are precluded from entering into any arrangements with the de facto Government of the Soudan, or from obtaining from that Government exequaturs for Consuls from the de facto Government; and what is the area of the territory called Tokar, over which the Egyptian Government intends to exercise civil and military power, as a portion of the territories under the sovereignty of the Khedive?

(1.) The rights of sovereignty are the Sultan's, not the Khedive's. Subjects of the Sultan resisting authority exercised in his name are rebels. Since 1885 the collisions which have occurred with any inhabitants of the Soudan have been provoked by themselves. (2 and 11.) We know nothing of the de facto Government of the Soudan. (3.) The Sultan of Turkey has not abandoned his rights over the Soudan. On the 30th of June, 1885, the Turkish Ambassador made a formal statement to that effect to the present Foreign Secretary. The Sultan has done nothing inconsistent with the title of the Khedive to the position of his Representative in his dominions in the Soudan or any part of them. (4, 5, 6, and 7) As I stated in answer to the hon. Member's question of March 2, we cannon undertake to define the limits of the Sultan's sovereignty in the Soudan. (8 and 9.) The only assurance given by Her Majesty's Government to the Khedive with respect to the defence of his territory is contained in Lord Granville's Despatches of December 13, 1883, and January 4, 1884—

"They will be prepared to assist in maintaining order in Egypt Proper, and in defending it as well as the ports in the Red Sea."

And again—

"Her Majesty's Government will on their part be prepared to assist in maintaining order in Egypt Proper, and in defending it as well as in continuing to protect the ports in the Red Sea."

(10.) Her Majesty's Government do not concur in the opinion expressed in this question. (12.) Tokar is a town, and the name is commonly given to the fertile oasis adjacent to it. We do not know its extent.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it has been decided to bring back to England the 2nd Battalion of Scots Guards from Bermuda before the usual time that a battalion on Foreign service returns Home; and, if so, how he intends to treat the extra cost of transport involved in this arrangement so that it shall not fall upon the taxpapers?

No decision has yet been come to as to the return from Bermuda of the 2nd Battalion Grenadier Guards. Whenever they are moved the cost will fall upon the Transport Vote.

Did I not understand the right hon. Gentleman to say last year that there had been no extra expense incurred?

No doubt, Sir, that was absolutely true at that time.

I beg to postpone the question of which I have given notice, to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that in neighbourhoods where the Post Offices are closed at or about 8 o'clock in the evening many licensed victuallers are in the habit of obliging their customers by selling them postage stamps; and whether the licensed victuallers are liable to a penalty for selling postage stamps to their customers after the Post Offices are closed, or, in cases where there is no post offices in the immediate neighbourhood, at any time during the day?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he could explain on what grounds the grant of 12s. par efficient Volunteer is held to be enough for the provision of the equipments required under the regulations in the cases of country battalions; if he is aware that the lowest charge at which these equipments are procurable is 18s.; if he can make a distinction in favour of battalions whoso detachments are widely scattered; and if he is aware that the regulation which limits this grant of 12s. to efficients on the previous October will adversely affect those corps which were below their strength at that time?

At the time the grant was fixed at 12s., it was supposed that that sum would fairly provide the articles of equipment in which Volunteers were usually deficient. It is found, however, that the demand for such large supplies in a short period has had the effect of inflating prices. I am further considering as to the date when the equipment must be complete. I shall be glad if my hon. Friend will repeat his question a short time hence.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will ascertain from the Coroner for Westminster, and state if, in the oath which under the Act of Parliament he administered to the jurors at the inquest, the late Duke of Bedford was described, consistently with the warrant and jury snmmons, as "F. Russell," or as "Francis Charles Hastings Russell," or if he was described, inconsistently with such documents, by some different name; and, if so, by what name?

I am informed by the Coroner that the jury were sworn to the full name and title of the deceased person.

May I ask what names were given? There have been several names mentioned in this case.

I have given the Coroner's exact words. I take it that the full name was the name in full.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate what public purpose is served by Table B, No. 1, appended to the Report of the Scotch Education Department of 22nd July, 1890; whether the Department has any information to lead them to believe that anything like 120,283 children, being one-seventh of the children of school age, may be receiving "education in higher schools" in Scotland as set forth in said Table; whether he is aware that, according to the same Table, it would appear that there are 419,169 children between the ages of 7 and 12 on the school register of State-aided schools in Scotland, whilst there are only 395,851 possible children in existence in Scotland between these ages available to attend State-aided schools on the basis or assumption of the Table; and whether the Department will, in future, eliminate Table B, No. 1, from their Reports?

The Table to which the hon. Member refers has appeared in the Report for many years. The assumption of one-seventh as the number of children who might be in attendance at higher schools, was based upon very careful inquiries made by the Schools Inquiry Commission in 1867, and has since been adopted as a general scale. But the Table referred to by the hon. Member at least serves a useful purpose in proving that the applicability of the scale to Scotland is more than doubtful. The Tables appended to the Report are annually revised and re-cast as occasion requires; but it is doubtful whether an alteration in the scale adopted, which might give rise to erroneous inferences, would be expedient on the eve of a new Census.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information with regard to an attack made by pirates (who were on board the ship as passengers) on or about 1st December, 1890, on a steamer voyaging from Hong Kong to Swatow, in which a passenger named Petersen and the Captain (Captain Pocock) were killed, and property to the value of £5,000 was taken by the pirates, who escaped from the ship by boats; and what steps have been taken to bring the perpetrators of this outrage to punishment?

Since answering the question put by the hon. Member for East Grinstead on the 2nd of February, the Admiral on the Station has reported that he had sent two ships of war to visit certain places to the north and south of Hong Kong, where it was thought some information might be obtained, but they totally failed to learn anything of value, and up to the 8th of January the pirates were still at large, instructions are being sent to the Governor of Hong Kong to report what measures he proposes to take with a view to preventing the surreptitious embarkation of arms by Chinese passengers in future.

I bog to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that nearly 50 persons were wounded, some of them dangerously, and all of them but three with blows behind, in the recent baton-charge by the police at Silksworth; that respectable unoffending persons, both male and female, quietly walking home by the very side of the police, were struck and kicked by them; what time, if any, was allowed to those persons to get out of the way between the time when the police faced about and the charge was delivered; and whether, in view of the serious allegations publicly made against the police, and in view of the probable renewal of the evictions, with the consequent excitement, he is prepared to order a public inquiry into the matter? Is it the fact that none of these persons made or attempted any resistance whatsoever?

I have received a Report from the Chief Constable and have also seen reports of newspapers of different shades of opinion concerning the conflict that unhappily occurred on February 25. Those reports do not bear out the allegations of the hon. Member. The Chief Constable informs me that some 30 persons were more or less injured, but none dangerously, and that only only one female, a little girl, was slightly hurt, having been (it is supposed) crushed by the crowd. It appears that the bailiffs were returning home, escorted by the police, when they and the police were assailed by a riotous crowd, chiefly, as I gather, from Sunderland, and not connected with the Silksworth mines. This crowd continued to shout and pelt the officers with stones and small rivets of iron from the shipyards, hitting many of them, until the superintendent in charge, an old and experienced officer, halted his party and loudly cautioned the mob to desist or he would be compelled to drive them away by force. No attention was paid to this warning; the police charged with drawn batons, and the crowd was dispersed. I am not prepared to say whether or not the police, after making this charge, kept within those bounds of moderation and self-defence which they ought to observe. I have, however, no information before me to show that serious allegations have been made publicly against them. I am informed that the hon. Member for Mid Durham and the miners' officials have openly praised the police for their forbearance in the performance of difficult duties in connection with this strike. The Chief Constable does not apprehend a renewal of excitement or disturbance. I would point out to the hon. Member that the police are reponsible to the Standing Joint Committee, and not to me; and that, if there has been misconduct or excessive violence on the part of the police, complaint should be made to the Local Authority, who will, I have no doubt, make whatever inquiry is necessary. I should be guilty of disrespect to them if I ordered a public inquiry without any evidence that they are not prepared to do their duty.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to allege that respectable and unoffending persons, male and. female, quietly walking home, by the very side of the police, were not struck and kicked. What time was allowed to these respectable people to get out of the way?

Will the right hon. Gentleman allow me to ask whether the term "praise" he has applied to the conduct of the police refers to their conduct during the evictions?

I stated, with as much accuracy as I could, that the praise was given to them for the manner in which they performed a difficult duty, and not in reference to any specific charge. With reference to the question of the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Storey) I can give him no answer beyond that which I have already given, that I cannot find either in the Report of the Chief Constable, or in the reports of the newspapers submitted to me, any confirmation of the allegations he has made. I do not undertake to deny them; all I say is that I do not find any confirmation of them.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman will make any further inquiry into the matter?

I think I have given an ample answer, and I would suggest that any further question should be addressed to those responsible for the conduct of the police.

I beg to give notice that I shall take the earliest opportunity of bringing this serious matter before the House, and of placing the real facts of the case before the right hon. Gentleman.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware of the difficulty which exists in villages and rural districts of obtaining suitable buildings for the purpose of holding public meetings, and whether he will consider the desirability of proposing or accepting legislation which shall secure to the ratepayers of a district, under certain safeguards as to interference with educational purposes and injury to the buildings, the use of rooms in schools in receipt of Parliamentary grants for local public purposes?

I believe the difficulty, which at one time existed, has been largely diminished, partly owing to increase in the number of village halls available for the purpose which the hon. Member has in view, and partly owing to the general desire on the part of managers of schools to meet all reasonable requirements in this connection, and I do not, therefore, as at present advised, see any necessity for further legislation of the character suggested.

I beg to give notice that on the Education Vote I will call attention to this subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the present price of mineral spirit being some 50 per cent. above that of mineral oil, any practice of mixing the former with the latter is now impossible; and whether he is aware that the regulation as to tank depôts in Clause 6 of the Inflammable Liquids Bill would, in the cases of small shops, be found quite impracticable, as also that in Clause 10 (d) with respect to the isolation of such depôts?

I am advised that the price of mineral spirit is in excess of that of mineral oil, though I cannot say whether it is so to the extent mentioned in the question. There is no provision in the Bill specially directed against the practice of mixing the spirit with the oil. My hon. Friend appears not to have read Clause 3 of the Bill, which contains no provision as to "tank depôts," as stated in the question. Clauses 2 and 3 are specially intended to protect small shops by enabling them to keep the stock usually stored in such shops without registration or license, and subject only to the restriction that the oil shall be kept in substantial closed metal vessels, a method of storage now largely employed and therefore not impracticable. Clause 10 (d) deals with licensed premises only, and lays down no fixed limits as to isolation of depôts. It merely expresses a power already-possessed under the existing law by Local Authorities of prescribing in their licences conditions as to the situation of the premises.

I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman, if he is aware that it is stated, at page 248 of the Year Book of Commerce for 1890–91, that, out of the total average annual numbers of fires in London during the four years ending 1889, namely, 2,209, only about two per cent., namely, 43, occurred in the shops of oil or colourmen; whether he is aware that the few fires which have occurred on the premises of wholesale dealers in petroleum oil have not been occasioned by petroleum oil, and that, in more than half the cases of such fires, although the premises and a large proportion of the stocks have been destroyed, the petroleum oil has not taken fire; and whether he has any, and, if so, what reason for doubting the accuracy of the figures given in the Year Book of Commerce?

Yes, Sir; I believe the figures quoted are substantially accurate. They appear to be based upon the Annual Reports of the Chief Officer of the Metropolitan Eire Brigade. I cannot admit the correctness of the statement in the second paragraph of the question. On the contrary, I am advised that some of the fires have been largely due to petroleum oil in their consequences and effects, and in some instances in their inception. I am further advised that it is not the fact that in such cases the oil has not taken fire, although in some instances there has been salvage of portions of the stock. It is the fact that petroleum oil has hitherto been generally supplied in substantially constructed barrels, but the practice of supplying it in tank wagons, from which the oil is conveyed into metal storage tanks, has rapidly increased, and already largely prevails in some districts. The storage in barrels is not a perfectly safe method, because the storage vessel has to be tapped for delivery. It is itself inflammable, it is liable to leak, and is much less safe than the metal tanks. I cannot express an opinion as to the relative danger arising from mineral oil as compared with turpentine, spirits of wine, and whisky, which must depend to a great extent on the conditions of storage, but the two latter articles can be mixed with and extinguished by water. The peculiar danger of mineral oil is that water does not extinguish it, and only helps to spread its devastating effects. Turpentine is not stored to anything like the same extent as mineral oil, and its much greater cost tends to secure more careful storage.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture when the Bill which he has in preparation for the prevention of adulteration of artificial manures and feeding stuffs will be introduced and put down for Second Reading; and whether, having regard to the fact that the principle of the Artificial Manures, &c. (Adulteration) Bill, now before the House, has been accepted in the resolutions passed by all the Chambers of Agriculture which have up to this date considered that Bill, by the Chemical Manure Manufacturers' Association, by the Incorporated Oil Seed Association, and by other corporate bodies interested in this question, and has received the unanimous approval of the agricultural Press, he proposes to embody in his own Bill the principle thus approved?

I do not think that I shall be able to introduce this Bill until after Easter. With regard to the Second Reading, the hon. Member must be aware that it is impossible for me to make any statements on that point at present. In reply to the second part of the question, I may say that I am in daily receipt of numerous communications on this subject, and they hardly lead me to the conclusion that the hon. Gentleman's Bill meets with the universal approval which he appears to suppose. I am, however, entirely in accord with the hon. Gentleman in the objects which he has in view, and I hope it may be possible to devise a measure which will be considered as acceptable by each of the two Parties who are so greatly interested in the question. With regard to the last question which the hon. Member has put to me, he will have ample opportunity of informing himself as to the principle of the Bill in question after it has been introduced and printed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of any agricultural body which has expressed anything but a general approval of this Bill?

In the communications which I have received some of the Agricultural Associations and Chambers have not expressed an entire approval of the Bill.

I beg to give notice that if the Bill of the right hon. Gentleman does not embody the principle of some sufficient guaranteed analysis with penalties for misrepresentation, I shall move, on the Second Beading of the Bill, that the Bill, together with my own, be referred to a Select Committee, and, if the necessity arises, I shall oppose the Second Beading of the Government measure.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the amount of the unexpended balance of the Dockyard and Store Votes of the year 1889–90 applicable to the Naval Defence Fund under "The Naval Defence Act, 1889 "; and whether any portion of this has been expended in the year 1890–91?

The unexpended balance at the close of 1889–90 under the head of "New Construction under the Naval Defence Act of 1889," for which provision was made in the Navy Votes, was—for materials and contract work (Vote 8, Sections 1, 2, and 3), £174,243. No portion of this sum has been expended during the present financial year.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he proposes to proceed with his Factory and Workshops Bill in Standing Committee before the House is in possession of, or has read a second time, the Public Health (London) Law Amendment Bill and the Public Health (London) Law Consolidation Bill, to be introduced by the President of the Local Government Board; and whether he proposes to proceed with the Factory Bill before the Easter Recess?

I hope to proceed with the Factory Bill before the Easter Recess, and I have every reason to expect that the Public Health (London) Law Amendment Bill will be in the possession of the House before much progress can be made with the Factory Bill.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the three years' contract for repairing barracks, fortifications, sea fronts, building stores, guardrooms, barrack officers' quarters, &c, comes to an end on the 31st March next; and what steps the Department intends to take, in reference to the new contract, to carry out the Resolution adopted by the House on 13th February in regard to the sub-letting of Government contracts and payment of fair wages?

The answer to the first question is "Yes." I have already approved a Circular, which will be issued to contractors, which lays down rules as to sub-letting and as to wages, in full accordance with the terms of the Resolution adopted by the House of Commons.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he intends to introduce the Budget before the Easter Recess?

I think not, Sir. I think it is very improbable.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in the case of vessels built in the United Kingdom to the order and delivery of foreigners, their values are not included in the Board of Trade Export Returns; and whether, seeing such vessels are built and equipped by material and labour, the product of this country, and thus form an essential part of export trade, he will consider the propriety of including such vessels in the Returns, or at least of appending their value to the Returns?

No, Sir. The values referred by the hon. Member are not at present included in the Trade Returns; but the question of appending a statement of the values of such vessels has been for some time under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government. In the event of its being decided to obtain this information, legislation would probably be necessary.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Hame Department whether he has taken, or will take, any steps in conjunction with the Treasury to increase the present staff of Factory and Workshop Inspectors?

I shall await the result of the legislative proposals now before Parliament before I decide whether any, and if, so what, increase of the existing staff may become necessary.

I beg-to ask the President of the Local Government Board with reference to the proposed arrangement for the provision of a public cemetery at Hyde, whether, in the event of a portion of the cemetery being consecrated, the Bishop of the Diocese would have the right to insist upon a separate chapel being built, at the expense of the rates, for the Episcopalians, in the consecrated portion of the cemetery; whether he would have control over all monuments and inscriptions in that portion of the cemetery; and whether he would have the right of appointing a chaplain to be paid for by the Corporation at a salary to be approved by him?

I do not understand that in the case of the Hyde cemetery, to which the hon. Member refers, any difference arises with regard to the provision of a separate chapel for the Episcopalians. The proposal that was submitted at the inquiry was that three chapels should be erected—one for the Church of England, one for Nonconformists, and one for Roman Catholics. As regards the question of control over monuments and inscriptions in the cemetery, the arrangement which I am informed was proposed on behalf of the Established Church was that the monuments should be under the control of the Town Council, the Council being responsible for all inscriptions being of a proper character. The right of appointing the chaplain would not, as suggested, devolve on the Bishop, but would be vested on the Town Council. The appointment and salary, however, would require the approval of the Bishop, but in order to meet objections to this requirement, the offer which, as I understand, was made to the Town Council, was that the stipend so fixed and approved should be a nominal one only, say £1 per annum, and that this salary should be deducted by the Town Council from the fees payable to the chaplain.

I beg to ask the Attorney General, whether his attention has been called to the case of "Frances Bennett v. The Buxton Lime Company," in the County Court, New Mills, Derbyshire, reported in the Sheffield Independent of 14th February, in which the County Court Judge is reported to have held that the company was justified in dismissing the plaintiff without notice by reason of his having taken part in an agitation for higher wages, although the rules of the company provided for a month's notice in writing; and whether it is the law that a workman forfeits his contract rights by taking part in strike or other agitations?

I am informed by the learned County Court Judge that the report in the Sheffield Independent to which the hon. Member refers is altogether inaccurate. He informs me that it was clearly proved at the trial that it has been the invariable practice, for at least 30 years, for both masters and men alike to determine their contract by giving a month's verbal notice. The plaintiff had received such a notice, but neither at the time of his dismissal nor after he had left did he raise any objection that the notice was not in writing.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the many recent cases of the House having been counted out on private Members' nights, the Government will take into consideration the expediency of proposing a change in the Standing Orders whereby the House, on such occasions, would be enabled to pass to the next business on the Paper instead of standing adjourned?

The counts out to which the hon. Member alludes were, I am afraid, attributable to a disinclination on the part of the House to take any further business, and I do not think the proposal of the hon. Member would be of any use in meeting such a state of things, nor, should an alteration of the Standing Orders of the House be lightly undertaken, even if it were possible to find the time for the necessary discussion.

I beg-to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the great excitement and apprehension which has been caused in India by the introduction into the Governor General's Council, by Sir Andrew Scoble, of a Bill fixing the ago of consent, in the case of married girls, at 12 years; whether he is aware that puberty very frequently takes place in Indian females before the age of 12 years, while there is no system of registration of births, and consequently no certitude as to the real age of the great majority of the population; whether he is aware that strong resolutions have been passed at mass meetings throughout the Indian Empire protesting against the Bill on the grounds that the European officials responsible for it are ignorant of the injurious effects which it will produce in the social and domestic life of the people, that it will lead to the ruin of innocent families by the fabrication of false charges and put a premium on oppression and extortion by subordinate officials, and declaring that it is a direct interference with native religion and usage, and a clear infringement of the Queen's Proclamation of 1858; whether it is the case, as stated in the Indian Press, that this Bill has been brought in at the request of Her Majesty's Government, in consequence of a single case of brutality by a bridegroom having occurred during the last 30 years; and whether the Government of India will now be advised to withdraw a measure which is viewed with the gravest apprehensions by large masses of the Indian people?

Before the question is answered I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware or if he has seen a memorandum addressed to the Governor General by 55 lady physicians in reference to a largo number of cases which have come within their own experience, in which they declare in the strongest terms against these marriages?

I wish to supplement the questions which have just been asked by another, namely, whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the most intelligent class of Hindoos, and nearly all the Mahommedans, are in favour of raising the age to 12 years?

I have been requested by my right hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for India to reply to this question. The Bill in question was introduced by the Government of India, with a full knowledge of the facts of the case and after very careful consideration. There is no intention of withdrawing it. In regard to the questions of the hon. Member for Leicester (Mr. Picton) and the hon. Member for Flintshire (Mr. S. Smith), I am not in a position to answer them, and if further information is required notice had better be given.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer the 3rd and 4th paragraphs of the question.

I think the answer I have given covers the whole of the question. It is impossible to enter into details.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the cost of magazine rifles made by contract is correctly stated in the letter from the War Office to the Under Secretary for India, dated 27th June, 1890, namely—

"The full price of the rifle is £5 12s. 6d., made up as follows: contract price, £5 9s.; butt and fore end (supplied to the contractors free by the War Office), 10½d. and 1s. 7½d. respectively; cost of extra view of certain components by War Office during manufacture of rifle, 1s.; total, £5 12s. 6d. (Note.—The original contract price was £5 10s., it was reduced to £5 9s. on account of extra view.) Accordingly, the total price payable by you for each rifle is £5 12s. 6d., as follows: to the Company, £2 14s. 6d.; to the War Office, £2 18s.; total, £5 12s. 6d; "

whether the contract price for bayonets and scabbards is 13s. and 2s. 2½d. respectively; and what is the estimated cost of bayonets and scabbards made in the Government factories?

The prices at that time are accurately stated in the Question; but since the letter in which they occur was written, some small savings have been effected as regards parts of the magazine rifle. The last balance sheet of the Ordnance Factories shows the cost of sword bayonets as 12s., and of scabbards as 3s. 8d., but it is believed that the two together are now made for about 14s. 3d.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Secretary of State has yet ascertained whether any Papers relating to the cost of civil justice in India can usefully be published; and if the Inquiry promised in June 1890 has resulted in the finding of such Papers, whether they will be placed in the hands of hon. Members?

I presume that the hon. Member refers to an answer given to the late Mr. Bradlaugh in July last. I can only repeat, in answer to the present question, the information given to Mr. Bradlaugh in a letter from the India Office in December last, namely, that the whole subject of the Bengal Judicial Establishments is under consideration; that the proposals of the Government of India have not yet been submitted to the Secretary of Stats in Council; and that, therefore, the correspondence is not in a state to be presented as a Parliamentary Return.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether definite information may be shortly expected?

No, Sir, I am unable to say.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Secretary of State will direct the Government of Bombay to so amend the new Bombay Salt Act that it shall not be possible for such acts as the boiling of water containing salt, duly purchased, accidentally spilled therein, or the boiling down of dirty salt, bought openly in the bazaar, to purify it, to be described as the "manufacture" of salt, rendering parties doing these things liable to punishment; (2) whether a recent judgment of the High Court of Bombay, while holding the punishment inflicted for the offences described above was excessive, and that the sentences should be nominal only, yet held that they were offences under the Act, punishable with fine and imprisonment; (3) whether, in legislation relating to the Government, salt monopoly in India prior to the Bombay Act of 1890, similar provisions were contained; and (4) whether in other parts of the Empire Salt Acts contain like clauses; and, if not, why such provisions should be required for Bombay?

The attention of the Government of Bombay has been called to the subject by the questions which have been asked in this House. The Secretary of State does not consider it necessary to issue the directions suggested. The answer to the second paragraph of the question is—yes. The answer to the third paragraph is that the provisions of the present Bombay Act for the protection of the Salt Revenue are more precise than those contained in the former Act; and the answer to the fourth paragraph is—yes.

I am not quite satisfied by the answer of the right hon. Gentleman whether any steps are being taken by the Indian Government to prevent the evils complained of.

I believe the Secretary of State considers that the law as it is administered is satisfactory.

I beg to postpone until Monday the question of which I have given notice to ask the Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any grants were made towards technical instruction in Ireland daring the year 1890 under the Technical Instruction Act of 1889; if so, for what particular branches of such instruction these grants were made, and what was the total amount in each branch; whether any steps have been taken to bring the facilities thus offered under the notice of those in Ireland for whom they were intended; if so, of what nature; if no such steps have been taken whether he will see what can be done in this direction; what was the total amount of grants for handicrafts or manual instruction in national schools in Ireland during the year 1890; and how many schools shared in these grants?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Guardians of the Ballyshannon Union have this year accepted a tender for printing and advertising largely in excess of the amount which a competent local contractor offered to do the work for; and if the Local Government Board has had its attention drawn to this waste of the rates in a Union for which relief works are being claimed?

I believe that the fact stated in the question is correct. The matter came at the time before the Local Government Board, who sent a warning to the Guardians.

I beg-to ask the Postmaster General if he is aware that the mails for the entire West Donegal district are delayed at Strabane for four hours, although a train starts from Strabane to Donegal after the arrival of the mail train at Strabane; what is the reason of this delay; and whether he will take steps for the speedy transmission of the mails from Strabane to Donegal?

The mails leaving Dublin in the morning for West Donegal are at present subject to the delay complained of, because the Department has not yet been able to arrange for the use of the train to which the hon. Member refers. I hope, however, that the matter may soon be satisfactorily adjusted.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that a large number of men in the Westport Union have been refused employment on the relief works; and, if so, whether he will give directions that all deserving applicants shall be engaged?

Every effort is made to secure that persons in absosolute need of relief, and that they alone, are employed upon relief works. The employment lists are revised from time to time, and the cases of all applicants receive careful consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he has come to any conclusion in reference to the extension of the railway from Loughrea to Woodford, which has been brought before his notice by memorial and deputation from the district, and which would not only provide work but be a great permanent boon to that isolated district? I also beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that only a small proportion of the men on Achill Island have been given relief work, and if it is his intention to increase the number so employed, or to distribute assistance in other ways, they and their families being on the verge of starvation; and, if it be true that only about one-fourth of the needful quantity of seed potatoes have been applied for, that a good many of these have been found to be rotten, and that, in many cases, the good ones are being consumed for food; and, if so, whether he can take any steps to remedy this state of things?

There are four relief works in Achill Island, giving employment on February 28th to 317 persons. Should it be deemed necessary to open further relief works on the Island, or to afford employment to a larger number of persons, the matter will, of course, be carefully considered. The Poor Law Guardians of Westport Union estimated that the quantity of seed potatoes required for Achill Electoral Division would be 58 tons 18 cwt., and that the number of occupiers requiring seed would be 172, giving an average of about 6 2–3 cwt. of seed potatoes to each occupier. The Inspectors are satisfied, after making careful inquiries, that the seed is good, with the exception of some damaged bags which have not been distributed.

Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to take any steps to ascertain the need for relief?

That is not so easy a matter as the hon. Gentleman seems to imagine. I am carefully watching in order to see whether it is necessary to set additional relief works going.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the distress prevailing among the numerous small farmers in the Kiltullagh and Ballinlough Electoral Divisions of the Castlerea Union, county Roscommon; and, whether the poor people of that district may hope for some mitigation of their suffering by the opening of relief works on an early day?

The position of this Union is engaging the attention of the Government.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Government has been drawn to the acutedistress in Ranafushe, Loughanoran, and Ranamona, in Anagany district, county Donegal; whether he is aware that in these localities fever prevails, deaths are extraordinarily numerous, 875 people are left without potatoes or other food, credit is exhausted, debts amount to an average of about. £10 per family, and the inquiry by the police many weeks ago has only resulted in assistance being given to 2 per cent. of the famishing population; and whether the Government will adopt prompt measures for the saving of life by affording immediate employment in the neighbourhood?

The West Coast of Donegal has caused considerable anxiety to the Government, and its condition is being carefully watched. It has not, so far, been found necessary to start relief works in the district of Anagry.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the description of the state of Lower Templecrone, County Donegal, contained in a letter to the Berry Journal of the 27th February and signed "J. O'Donnell, Ranafast," is substantially accurate; whether the Reports of the police show that there is great want and destitution in the Electoral Division of Anagry, particularly Ranafast; whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Report of his Inspector concerning these districts; and whether he can give any assurance that steps will be taken to meet the great distress in this locality?

It is the case that there is poverty among the helpless families in Lower Templecrone. Their eases are under consideration.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether the seven hours rule in the Savings Bank Department in London will apply to women employed in the Clearing House branch, Dublin; and whether, in view of the fact that women employed in the former Department in London receive a minimum salary of £100, whilst those employed in the latter in Dublin receive only£70, any arrangements are in contemplation to bring the rules of payment more nearly to an equality?

In reply to the hon. Member, I have to say that I have not yet come to any decision on the subject alluded to in the question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can explain why, although the subscribers to the Constabulary Force Fund have repeatedly pressed for an account of the income and expenditure of that fund, no such account has ever been rendered; what was the amount of the Force Fund in 1863, and what it amounts to now; and whether the authorities have any objection to a public audit of this public fund as requested by the Petition of the pensioners presented to this House in 1888?

The hon. Member appears to be under a misapprehension in supposing that any general desire has been expressed by the subscribers to the Constabulary Force Fund for the rendering to them an account of the fund. Some memorials from pensioners were received by the Constabulary Authorities on the subject, but on investigation it was found that fully one-half of the memorialists were not subscribers to the fund, and had no pecuniary interest in it. There were no accumulations in this fund in 1863. The present accumulated fund dates from the Constabulary Act of 1866, and now amounts to £146,000; but, as explained in reply to former questions, this falls far short of the sum required to meet the benefits promised by the Government to contributors, and to secure those benefits the Government are about to ask Parliament to give a sum of £150,000 to be added to the present capital of the fund. The fund is regularly audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been drawn to a serious collision in Donegall Street, Belfast, between a tramcar and another vehicle at the narrow part of the street where the provisions of the Act of Parliament had been infringed in the laying of the tram lines, and, as loss of life had quite recently taken place at the same point, would he impress upon the Local Authority the necessity for securing greater safety for the ordinary traffic of the city at this and other equally dangerous points?

The only collision between a tramcar in Belfast and another vehicle, which has come under the notice of the police, occurred in Royal Avenue. The matter subsequently came before the Recorder on appeal, who acquitted the tramway officials of all blame. The other case to which my hon. Friend refers is probably that of a schoolboy, who was run over by a passing tramcar when jumping off the foot of another tramcar, on which he had been riding surreptitiously. The coroner's jury found the death to be accidental. I have no doubt the Local Authority give due attention to all such cases that come before them.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been drawn to the fact that some persons engaged in the pawn broking trade in Belfast had adopted the practice of discounting Army Pension Papers, though such Papers distinctly indicated the illegality of such a course; and whether he would give instructions to the Royal Irish Constabulary to test the validity of these charges, and to take such steps against those who might be found guilty of the offence as would check the recurrence of such a practice?

I am informed that some pawnbrokers in Belfast have adopted the practice referred to in the question. The police have made efforts to obtain sufficient grounds for a prosecution, but hitherto without success. I shall, however, consider what further steps should be taken.

I beg to ask the Secretary of the Treasury whether the Treasury refuse to allow loans to Town Commissioners in Ireland for public improvements to be made on the same terms, namely, the repayment of principal and interest by an annuity, as loans to landlords and farmers for private improvements; and, if so, for what reason?

Loans to landlords and farmers are made under a special Act of Parliament which prescribe the terms of repayment. Loans to Town Commissioners are made under an entirely different principle, and I see no reason why the two should be assimilated.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether the Government will consent to the Motion for a Return, Justices of the Peace (County Cavan), which is on the Paper for this day?

It would be contrary to precedent to give all the details asked for in this Return, but there is no objection to give a Return of the names and occupations of the Magistrates; and a Return of the Magistrates who attend Petty Sessions may be added if required.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman refuse to give the rateable value?

It would be contrary to precedent.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what has been the result of the Conference between the Irish Government and the Irish Prisons Board, concerning the unanimous protest of the Corporation of Belfast against the projected alterations of Her Majesty's Prison at Belfast, upon the several grounds that they would create an eyesore, destroy the frontage line, and deteriorate the value of property in the district?

I have suggested that there shall be a Joint Committee or some analogous body, and in the deliberation of which representatives, both of the Corporation and the Prison Board, shall take part to consider this difficult question. I am in hopes that this plan may lead to a satisfactory settlement of the matter.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that complaints have been made by suitors and the public generally in regard to the delay on the part of the officials of the different Courts connected with the Pour Courts, Dublin, in making up the orders and decrees given by the different Judges, almost a month, and sometimes even two months, elapsing in getting out the order; whether the different Law Societies have repeatedly complained of such delays; and, whether, in view of the fact that the hours of attendance at the Four Courts are from 11.30 to 3.30, whereas in London the Judges sit from 10.30 to 4.30, some steps will be taken at an early date to ensure the greater despatch of business at these Courts, in the interest of the professional gentlemen practising there and of the public at large?

I am not able to accept the statements of fact contained in the question of my hon. Friend, either as to the hours of attendance at the Four Courts, or as to the existence of repeated complaints of delay on the part of the officials of this Court. As regards the Common Law Divisions I find that no complaints have been made on the score of delay, and that orders are issued within a day or two after they have been made by the Judges. As regards the Chancery Division the matter appears to have been brought before the Lord Chancellor by the Council of the Incorporated Law Society in November, 1890, and is referred to in their last Report, from which it would appear that their complaints are directed rather against the course of procedure in this division than against the action of the officials of the Courts. I am informed that no complaints have been made since that date. From the nature of orders in the Chancery Division, it would be impossible to have them drawn up and issued as rapidly as the ordinary run of Common Law Orders, and I have no reason to believe that suitors have any just ground of complaint on the score of delay.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland can he state the cost of keeping three policemen on Castle Island, adjacent to Schull, County Cork; and if the rent is annually £96?

The Constabulary authorities report that no additional cost is incurred in the matter referred to. The landlord provides house accommodation and other requisites free of charge.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the case of Miss Quane, who has been sent to gaol in Tipperary on the charge of "hooting the police," would he explain in what the alleged crime consisted, and under what law it is punishable; upon what evidence was Miss Quane convicted; and by whom was the sentence imposed upon her?

The woman referred to was summoned at the time for being one of a disorderly crowd which stoned the police in December, 1889. She did not obey the summons. A warrant was thereupon issued, but she evaded arrest until the 23rd ult. She was brought up before a Court of ordinary Petty Sessions, the Bench consisting of five Magistrates. The evidence of the police was uncontradicted. The Magistrates ordered the woman to find bail to keep the peace, and to be of good behaviour. This she refused to do, electing to go to prison in default. The committing Justices, however, subsequently recommended the case to the clemency of the Lord Lieutenant, on the ground that the offence was committed so long ago. The woman has accordingly been released from custody.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has any statistics showing the amount of interest requisite to pay the mortgages existing on Irish agricultural land, the average rate of interest charged for these mortgages, and the amount of the annuities charged on agricultural land in Ireland which are paid by the owners of the land; and, if so, whether he can present this information to the House?

I have no information which would enable me to answer this question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what is the result of the consideration given by the Treasury to the proposals of the Postmaster General respecting the Larne and Stranraer route?

No, Sir; no decision has been arrived at, but the matter is under consideration.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether after the evidence that has been given at the hearing of the recent prosecutions against Messrs. Topping and Walkington, Belfast, concerning the misleading description that is branded upon American lard, to the effect that such lard is sold in England as Irish, the Attorney General for England will direct the police to enforce in Bristol, and in the other English towns in which this lard is sold, the provisions of "The Merchandise Marks Act, 1887?"

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will allow me to answer this question. I have not seen the evidence, but I will communicate with the Attorney General for Ireland, and if I find that the evidence is sufficient to warrant a prosecution I will take that step.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that numerous complaints have been made by the fishermen engaged in the fisheries off Castletown, Berehaven, of constant attacks and depredations committed on them and their property by French fishermen cruising in large luggers; and whether the Admiralty, in view of the fact that the mackerel fishing season is now at hand, will despatch two or three well-fitted cruisers to protect the interests of the fishermen so attacked?

I have not heard of any complaints made by the fishermen in the neighbourhood of Castletown, Berehaven, of depredations by French fishermen. There are at present two sailing cruisers at Bantry, and they will shortly be re-inforced by a steam cruiser. The services of all these vessels will be available, if required, to maintain order.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether information has reached him that the agents and employés of "The Scomber and Mackerel Fishing Syndicate" are in the habit of molesting parties suspected of buying fish from vessels fishing off the South-Western Coast of Ireland; and, if so, under what authority they interfere with persons engaged in their lawful calling?

No Report on this subject has been received, either by the Admiralty or by the Irish Government.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Samuel Jagoe, J. P., at the Petty Sessions held at Ballydehob, County Cork, 16th January last, ad indicated in a case in which he had himself been examined as a witness, notwithstanding the remonstrances of Mr. Notter, J.P.; whether complaints have reached him that the deafness of Mr. Jagoe, who, though about 75 years old, has been only recently appointed to the Magistracy, is a serious inconvenience to the litigants; and whether it is intended to take any action in the matter?

I am informed that, previous to the hearing of the case, the gentleman mentioned had been sitting as a Magistrate on the Bench; and, after giving evidence, he resumed his seat there. He has, however, assured the Lord Chancellor that he had no intention of taking part in the adjudication, and that, in fact, when the case was called on, he stated in open Court that he would not adjudicate upon it. No allegation, either as to deafness or as to inconvenience to litigants, has been made to the Lord Chancellor in reference to this gentleman.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that a police constable named Connell, stationed at Schull, County Cork, deliberately loaded his rifle in the presence of a large assemblage of people returning from a meeting which was addressed by Mr. William O'Brien, M.P.; whether he is also aware that Connell, with another police constable, followed Mr. William O'Brien from Schull to Bantry, carrying a loaded rifle in his hand; and whether police constables, when following Irish Members of Parliament, are ordered to carry loaded firearms?

I must ask the hon. Gentleman to put down the question for a later day.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the fees paid to the Houses of Commons and Lords by promoters of Private Bills bring in a considerable Revenue to the Treasury; if so, what the amount was last year; and further, whether he will consider the advisability of proposing to the House a reduction of the present scale?

I am informed that the fees received on Private Bills in the House of Commons during the financial year 1889–90 amounted to about£24,800. The fees received in the House of Lords were probably about the same amount. It is not in contemplation to make any reduction in the present scale of fees.

What is the balance of profit to the Treasury on these fees?

It would be rather difficult to state accurately.

Does the First Lord of the Treasury think it right that the expenses of the House of Commons should be paid by the promoters of Private Bills?

I am afraid that the answer to that question requires consideration; but I do not think that Private Bill promoters are the most necessitous and deserving class of the community.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government will consider the advisability of referring to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council the determination of the question whether Roman Catholics are or are not eligible to hold the offices of Lord Chancellor of England and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in the same manner in which it is proposed to take the opinion of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council with regard to the state of the Marriage Law in Malta?

The Government are not prepared to adopt the course suggested by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the submarine telegraph communications on the West Coast of South America from Valparaiso running North are in the control of a United States Company domiciled in New York, and the land line (the Trans Andean) from Valparaiso to Buenos Ayres is owned by a Chile Argentine Company, domiciled in Valparaiso; whether the Despatches recently received from the British Admiral commanding the Squadron on the West Coast of South America and from the British Minister in Chile reached London by either of these routes, and whether these Despatches are in cypher or in ordinary language; and if Her Majesty's Government will use their influence with the Government of Chile to permit commercial messages to come freely?

Part of the Northern line is in the hands of an English Company, part of an American, the line to Buenos Ayres in those of a local company. The Despatches received from Her Majesty's Minister could only come by one of these routes; they were in cypher; some from the Naval Commander-in-Chief were sent from ports in Peru. Chile is not a member of the Telegraph Union, and is therefore unrestricted as regards telegraph communications; but even if she were, the Convention provides for the stoppage of private messages in code or cypher when it is considered to be contrary to the interests of the State that they should be sent. In these circumstances, Her Majesty's Government do not feel that they can at present make any representations on the Subject to the Chilian Government.

I bog to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government have received from the British South Africa Company a Minute or Memorandum of the terms upon which they are prepared, in the event of their obtaining' possession of the territory claimed by the Mozambique Company, to confirm the grants and concessions made by that company: and, if so, what is the effect of it; whether it is the fact that the British South Africa Company cannot, by their charter, acquire powers of administration over any territory by Treaty without the approval of the Secretary of State; and whether the Secretary of State will make it a condition of his approval of the acquisition by the British South Africa Company of powers of government and administration over Manicaland by any Treaty that the British South Africa Company respect, and confirm all grants and concessions made by the Mozambique Company in favour of or now vested in British subjects?

No such Minute or Memorandum has been received as is mentioned in the first paragraph. The British South Africa Company can acquire powers of administration by agreement, but they cannot exercise them without the approval of the Secretary of State. Whatever may be the arrangements made or sanctioned by Her Majesty's Government with regard to Manica, the lawfully acquired rights of individuals and companies will receive every consideration.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the statement is correct that lodging house keepers have been charged 9d. in the £1 as formerly; and, if so, what steps he proposes to take in order that the amount in excess should be refunded?

In order to obtain the concession granted by the Act of last Session, lodging house keepers were required to have their names registered before July I last, a date subsequently extended to August 31, in order that ample notice might be given of the requirements of the law. It would be impossible to make any concession now in favour of those who, under these circumstances, failed to comply with the conditions demanded by the law. But, of course, they will be able to secure the benefits of the lower charge in future by registering themselves each year within the proper time.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that there is acute distress in the parish of Gartan, County Donegal; and, whether he intends to take any steps to alleviate it?

The condition of the locality mentioned is receiving the careful attention of the Government.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board a question of which I have given him private notice. It is whether, considering the misapprehension that exists, he can inform the House what locus standi the County Councils will have to appear before the Select Committee appointed to consider the Metropolitan Water Bill?

The Water Bills have been referred to a Hybrid Committee with instructions to hear petitioners. There is no question of locus in the matter, and indeed the County Councils will have the right to appear. I understand that Petitions were presented yesterday against each Bill.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether there is any truth in what has appeared in the newspapers with regard to the duration of the Easter Holidays?

No, Sir; no decision has been come to on the subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether it is the fact that Saturday next is the last day for the presentation of Petitions against the Railway Rates Provisional Order Bills, and whether the right hon. Gentleman will state the intentions of the Government in reference to enlarging the period?

I do not know whether Saturday is the latest day for the presentation of Petitions, but, if it is, I propose to ask the House to pass some Resolution like that it has passed with reference to the Water Bill, allowing all petitioners to be heard who apply five clear days before the opening of the Committee.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many soldiers of the Foot Guards are now stationed in London, and how many of these each day are not available for drill or other purposes of military training, from the cause of either going on or coming off guard; and whether the present posts of sentries on the public buildings of London have been selected for military or for political reasons?

There are at present 2,449 non-commissioned officers and men of the Foot Guards stationed in London, of whom 324 are detailed for guard duties. The sentries at public buildings are not posted for purely military purposes.

May I ask whether there is any intention on the part of the Government to attempt to proceed to-night with the Electors' Registration (Acceleration) Bill.

Only with the consent of the House.

Is it intended to proceed with the Bill before Easter?

It cannot take precedence of Supply or other urgent Public Business. It is for hon. Members themselves to say whether it should be taken after 12 o'clock.

What is to be the business next week?

Supply.

What Supply?

I am not able to say positively. We shall go on with the Supplementary Estimates until they are concluded.

I wish, Mr. Speaker, to raise a question of Privilege. I desire to call the attention of the House to the fact that I, as a Member of this House, was libelled yesterday by the chief editor or someone in the office of a daily print called the Daily News. I am told that it is a paper printed for the use of Gladstonians, and is read by them; but some of my friends may read the paper too, and, as it imputes to me dishonourable conduct as a Member of the House, I think you will admit that it may impute the same conduct to any other Member of this House to-morrow. The libel is as follows:—

"At a late hour on Monday night Mr. Atkinson moved the House into Committee on his Marriage of Nonconformists (Attendance of Registrars) Bill. This was contrary to an understanding that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee. The only way out of the difficulty in which the House now finds itself is that the Bill shall pass through Committee pro formâ, to be re-committed to a Select Committee, and that course will probably be taken."

I do not often read that paper, but yesterday morning some kind friend sent it to me. I immediately wrote to the editor, and sent a special messenger with the letter. I quoted the words that he had printed, and then I said that what he had stated was a falsehood. I said also that I should be very glad if he would inform his informants of this, as, though they seemed to know so much of what was going on in the House, their information was quite worthless, and worse than worthless. Then I wound up most politely by saying that, although I was a political opponent, I always fought fairly, if as strongly as I could, and I hoped that if in future he dealt with me again he would try to deal with me fairly. I also said that the bearer would wait for a reply. The bearer came back and said there was no reply. So I thought that perhaps the editor did not like my note, and I would wait to see it in print. I have turned the paper over this morning in every direction, but there is nothing of my letter in the paper. If a man tells a falsehood, wittingly or unwittingly, when he is told that it is a falsehood it is his duty to confess it, and it was the editor's duty to give me an opportunity of contradicting the falsehood. I now say that when on Monday I came to the House to do my duty I did not know that I was entitled to take the Committee stage of my Bill, but I was informed of the fact by friends. I have consistently declined to go to a Select Committee, because I have been obstructed in that way for six years, and because I do not want to be obstructed again. After having obtained the Committee stage in the most regular manner, after consulting the clerks at the Table, my friends in the House and other hon. Members on the other side, whom I told in, I hope, a straightforward and gentlemanly manner what I was going to do—after doing all this it is hard to be held up as a man who had taken advantage of the House by taking a stage when those hon. Members who desired to get home early had gone away. If I would do a thing of that kind I am not fit to sit in this House, either on this side or on that side. I wish, Mr. Speaker, to move that the editor be brought here to the bar of the House and made to apologise. If I had told a falsehood to anyone I would apologise, and I think the editor ought to. My right hon. Friend the leader of the House will now regret that he did not help me to carry my measure to make people sign their names to the leaders they write because now we should know who wrote this libel, and in future we should be able to regard that person as one who has told a falsehood. Under these circumstances, I put myself in the hands of the House, not as Mr. Atkinson, because what I say and do has nothing to do with it, but as a Member of Parliament engaged in the performance of his constitutional duties, and who was actually legislating by your favour at the time, and was doing his duty to his constituents and pushing a Bill which has been obstructed persistently for six years by those who ought to have helped it forward. The Attorney General will confirm what I say, that on that very night I was appealed to by one of my right hon. Friends—before the Attorney General jumped up—to go into a Select Committee, and I said "No, I would not," for I could not agree to it. Therefore, under such circumstances, I ask Mr. Speaker, and I ask the House generally, to be good enough to protect the privileges not only of myself, but of the other 699 Members at all events.

I trust my hon. Friend will be satisfied with the statement which he has made to the House. Undoubtedly, it is a painful matter for him to be accused of dishonourable conduct in a newspaper of considerable position; but I am sure greater experience and knowledge of the practice of Parliament and of the reports, which are usually so very accurate, of proceedings in this House will induce him to overlook what I believe to be a mistake and not a wilful misrepresentation on the part of the journal in question; and to accept the assurance which I give him that I distinctly understood he refused to allow this Bill to be referred to a Select Committee, and that the course he took on the occasion in question was one which he was entitled to take, and certainly was not in derogation of his duties as a Member of Parliament.