I beg to move the following Amendment:—

"Line 1, leave out 'Every Bill by which a Railway, Canal, or Tramroad Company is incorporated, shall contain a clause to the following effect,' and insert,' In the case of every Bill for incorporating a Railway, Canal, or Tramroad Company, or for giving any powers to an existing Railway, Canal, or Tramroad Company to which no Rates and Charges Order Confirmation Act expressly applies, the Committee on the Bill shall fix the rates and charges for merchandise traffic (including small parcels of a perishable nature conveyed by passenger train) by reference to the Rates and Charges Order Confirmation Act of some other Company which, in the opinion of the Committee, will properly and conveniently apply; and the Committee shall, in the case of an existing Company, provide that the rates and charges for merchandise traffic, and such small parcels as aforesaid so fixed, shall be in substitution for the rates and charges for similar traffic authorised to be taken by the Company under their existing Acts.

If the Committee shall be of opinion that no such Act as aforesaid will properly and conveniently apply they shall insert a clause to the following effect.'"

I may explain that this Amendment practically carries out what has been the practice of the House for the last two or three years. The Board of Trade had been in the habit of requiring a clause of this nature to be put in Bills, and it was thought desirable that there should be a conference between the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords, the Chairman of Ways and Means here, the President of the Board of Trade, and the President of the Local Government Board. That conference was held, and as a result this Amendment was arrived at to secure uniformity of practice between the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

said he had Amendments to the proposal on the Paper, but he had no wish to press them if they were considered unnecessary.

The Amendments are unnecessary.

said the Amendments applied to canals as well as to railways, therefore the word "tolls" should be inserted as well as "rates and charges," for the reason that the bulk of the traffic on the canals was carried by toll. Private owners ran their barges along the canals, paying so much by way of toll, and it seemed to him that unless the alteration he proposed was effected, great difficulty would be experienced in working the Standing Order.

assured the hon. Member that the object he had in view would be effected by the Amendment as it stood.

said the whole object of the Legislation of 1888, in the 24th Section of the Act of that year, and the proceedings that had taken place under it, was to ensure that the classifications under which traffic was carried should be uniform throughout the country, and that the rates also should be uniform. That was fairly met by the Amendment the right hon. Gentleman proposed. He doubted, however, whether it was worth while to continue the power of a Committee on a Bill to insert some entirely different classification, and conditions and rates, subject to revision three years afterwards by the Board of Trade. The right hon. Gentleman would agree with him that in so far as that would lead to a further number of private Acts differing from the Provisional Orders already passed it would not be a public benefit. Why should a Committee have power to insert a scale of rates and charges in a Bill that might be much higher than anything that Parliament had sanctioned? He should like to see the omission of the second part of the proposed Standing Order, which he believed was only proposed two years ago as a temporary arrangement. He, therefore, moved the omission of the last three lines of the Amendment by which that temporary arrangement was to be retained.

said the Standing Order had already been passed by the House of Lords, and agreement in the matter had been come to by the officials of that House, of the House of Commons, of the Board of Trade, and of the Local Government Board.

said that was not a sufficient answer to the point he had raised. It was desirable that the rates and charges should be uniform, but under the latter part of the Standing Order, they might be varied by a Select Committee. He should be sorry to agree to the continuance of this alternative Standing Order if it were possible to do without it. If the point were placed before the House of Lords, probably they would reconsider the matter.

Perhaps it would be as well to put off the Standing Order until Monday to allow time for a conference with the House of Lords.

said he would withdraw his Amendment with that view and move the adjournment of the Debate.

In the absence of the right hon. Baronet the Member for the University of London, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he proposes to take any, and, if so, what steps to carry out the recommendations of the Select Committee on Forestry.

As was stated by my predecessor, in reply to the similar question put by the right hon. Baronet on the 6th March, 1891, the statutory powers of the Board of Agriculture are strictly limited, and we have no means and no power of giving effect directly to the recommendations of the Select Committee, either as regards the establishment of a School or Schools of Forestry, or the creation of a Board of Forestry. I am, however, in full sympathy with the desire to promote the development of education in Forestry, and we are, I think, doing all that we can in that direction. We have continued to make a substantial grant towards the cost of lectures in the University of Edinburgh under the auspices of the Royal Scottish Arboricultural Society, and towards the cost of the chair which has been established in the Durham College of Science, to include the teaching of Forestry. A course of free instruction to practical foresters and gardeners in connection with the Royal Botanic Gardens at Edinburgh, to which we have devoted the sum of £150, is now in progress; and in view of the fact that a course of lectures in Forestry has been started in connection with the Glasgow and West of Scotland Technical College we have increased our grant to that Institution. We also propose to continue to give the statistical information as to woods and plantations which was supplied for the first time in 1891. I shall always be glad to receive and to consider any suggestions for the increase of sound technical knowledge on this subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the estimated cost per rifle of the reduced number of rifles proposed to be manufactured in 1893-4 at Enfield and Sparkbrook factories, and what increase per rifle will be incurred as compared with the present cost?

The actual present cost cannot be stated until the balance-sheet for 1892–3 is completed; but it is estimated that the present cost per rifle is £3 15s., and that the reduction of output for 1893–4 will bring the cost per arm to about £4.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether it is a fact that under existing arrangements money expended by High-laud Parochial Boards on erecting houses for parochial medical officers has to be repaid in one year; and, if so, whether steps will be taken to allow the payments to be spread over a term of years so as to enable poor districts to provide suitable accommodation for their medical officer?

By the Poor Law Act of 1845 which decides such questions in Scotland, Parochial Boards are forbidden to borrow money for the erection of any buildings except poor-houses? I am not prepared to promise the hon. Member that the Government will during the present Season take up such a large question as the amendment of this important law.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Treasury has received from the Education Department any recommendations for the exceptional promotion of specially meritorious clerks of the Second Division to the higher grade of their Division; and, if so, how many such recommendations have been received, at what dates, and with what result?

A recommendation was made by the Education Office on 24th December, 1891, for the special promotion of 2 Second Division clerks to the higher grade of the Division, and the Treasury on the 14th of the following month replied that, they did not consider that the circumstances constituted "a very exceptional case," within the meaning of Clause 6 of the Order in Council. This application was renewed in December last, and has been considered together with those from other Departments, but, as at present advised, the Treasury does not consider that a case has been made out for the exercise of the powers specially reserved to the Treasury by the clause in question.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the Education Department have warned the Wefre St. Mark's National School, Flint, that the fixed grant will be reduced to 7s., en the ground that the accommodation is insufficient, although the accommodation was admitted to be sufficient by the Education Department some years ago, when the average attendance was larger than at present; whether he is aware that the overcrowding of the infants' department noticed on the occasion of Her Majesty's Inspector's visit was caused by special and temporary arrangements made for the convenience of the Inspector, and that the Annual Reports show that the work of the school is good, and the average of passes 96 to 98; and whether, under these circumstances, he will withdraw the warning?

Warning has been given to the managers of this school that the grant to the infant class will be reduced from 9s. to 7s., in accordance with the Code, unless the very serious overcrowding is promptly remedied. The infant room in the school has accommodation for 68 children only, but during the last school year the average attendance was 90, and there were no less than 125 infants on the books at the end of the school year. The work of the school is reported as being generally satisfactory. Since 1891 there has, of course, been no percentage of passes for older children, and there never was a system of individual passes for infants. In the circumstances, I see no reason for withdrawing the warning.

I beg to give notice that at the proper time I shall call attention to this matter.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Merionethshire, as Charity Commissioner, whether the Charity Commissioners have submitted a scheme for intermediate education in Flintshire to the Education Department?

The Flintshire Scheme was published on January 26. The statutory period during which objections can be lodged will elapse in three days. These will be considered and the scheme then submitted to the Education Department.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether application has been quite recently made for leave to form a corps of Volunteer Fortress Engineers, not for Leith especially, but for the Edinburgh district; and why the General Officer Commanding in Scotland declined to forward the application to the War Office; and whether, if the application is renewed in the autumn, he will undertake to give the proposal his careful consideration?

The General Officer Commanding the Scottish District reports that his predecessor did not consider it necessary to refer the question of the formation of another Volunteer corps for either Edinburgh or Leith to the War Office, because the corps already established there were greatly below their establishment. Until this difficulty is removed I cannot undertake to consider any proposal in the direction indicated by the noble Lord.

Is it not the fact that the officers commanding other Volunteer corps did object?

I believe so; but, as I said the other day, the objection was withdrawn. This is, however, an objection on the part of the War Office. So long as the other corps are so far below their establishment we cannot contemplate the creation of a new corps.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Government will consider the advisability of appointing a Committee to inquire into the relations between the War Office and the Treasury, and to report whether any changes in those relations have become necessary?

I am fully alive to the importance of this question, but there is no intention at present of instituting such an inquiry as is indicated by the noble Lord.

I beg to ask the Parliamentary Charity Commissioner whether he can state how many of the names proposed as new Trustees of the Ellis-Davies Charity at Cerrig-y-druidion, Denbighshire, are residents of the parish, and how many are from other and distant parishes; whether these names were suggested by the existing Trustees; if so, whether he can state what are their names; whether he is aware that other names of persons qualified to act as Trustees have been submitted to the Commissioners by the ratepayers of the parish, and that these nominations were supported by a Petition largely signed by residents in the neighbourhood; and whether he can state the decision of the Commissioners as to the lists submitted respectively by the Trustees and ratepayers of the parish?

It is gathered from the addresses given in the application that of the 11 proposed new Trustees two are resident in the parish of Cerrig-y-druidion, and that nine are resident in parishes more or less distant from that parish. The names of the proposed Trustees were suggested by the ex-officio Trustees of the Charity, the Bishop and Dean of St. Asaph, and the Rector of the Parish. The unofficial Trustee, Mr. Howel Lloyd, did not concur in the nomination. A Petition suggesting different names, with one exception, and signed by about 200 persons purporting to be landowners, ratepayers, or otherwise connected with the parish, has been received by the Commissioners, who are awaiting a communication from the Joint Education Committee of Denbighshire before coming to a decision as to the appointment of Trustees for the Charity.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what is the number of coastguards at present stationed in Ireland?

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this question. By latest Returns there are 1,188 coastguard officers and men stationed in Ireland.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he is aware that medical officers at Haslar Hospital are not permitted to administer anæsthetics without leave from head-quarters in London; and whether the medical staff of the Navy is short of its full compliment of officers, and why, if that be so, there was no examination for new candidates in February?

; The medical officers at Haslar, as at all other naval hospitals, are permitted to administer anæsthetics whenever they consider it is necessary they should do so, and they are under no obligation to refer to the Medical Department in London, nor is there any record of such an application ever having been made. The Medical Staff of the Navy is only three short of the full number for which provision has been made in the Estimates. Examinations are not now held in February, but in May and November as required.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what Departments are considered by the Treasury as being exempt from the rule applicable to the rest of the Civil Service requiring compulsory retirement at the age of 65 years; and on what special grounds such exemption is allowed in each of these Departments?

The Treasury considers that the Order in Council extends to all permanent officers of the Civil Service, above the Second Division, whatever the Department in which they are serving. Whether officers of the Supreme Courts of the three countries are technically within this definition is open to some doubt, but the Lord Chancellor of England accepts the general principles of the Order, and is considering means by which effect can best be given to them in the Legal Departments. The Presidents and Professors of the Queen's Colleges in Ireland have submitted reasons for holding that they are not affected by the Order, but the Treasury as at present advised is unable to accept the contention. No other claims to exemption remain unsettled so far as I am aware.

Does the right hon. Gentleman include all the Departments included in the Civil Service Estimates?

Yes, except those indicated in my answer.

Does it include the case of the Irish Fishery Inspectors?

They are in the same position as other Civil servants.

Will the 65 years' Rule apply to the Treasury Bench?

It applies to the Treasury, but I need hardly say not to the Treasury Bench.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is the fact that warrant officers have recently been disallowed the right to deposit in the regimental savings banks; and, if so, on what special grounds; whether the rate of interest allowed to private soldiers and (until recently) warrant officers is 3¾ per cent.; and, if so, how the War Office maintains these banks except at a loss; and whether any portion of such loss is only made good by the fact that the War Office retains for considerable periods sums deposited by deceased soldiers before distributing them amongst the next of kin, and also draws upon the balances standing in the name of deceased or discharged soldiers to meet regimental claims, such as barrack hospital clothing and other stoppages.

Under the Military Savings Bank Act, warrant officers are not allowed the advantages of the system, although, when the number of warrant officers was largely increased a few years ago, some, by inadvertence, were permitted to continue their accounts. This was stopped when it was detected. The rate of interest allowed is 3¾ per cent., which, of course, can only be granted at a cost to the State. For some years after the institution of those banks, Votes were taken for the interest. It was subsequently discovered that the sums voted had been in excess of the sums required, and the Votes ceased. The funds accumulated, however, have sufficed for the present to meet the extra charge. The additional charge is not in any way met in the manner suggested.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, with reference to the recommendation of the Roya Commission of 1890, that the allowance of £100 a year granted to Third Secretaries in the Diplomatic Service for a knowledge of International Law should be discontinued, and that as a compensating advantage, £100 a year should be paid to them immediately on joining the Service instead of remaining two years unpaid, whether, although the allowance for knowledge of law has been withdrawn, they still remain two years without pay, thus inclining an approximate loss of £500 before attaining the rank of Second Secretaries?

The facts are as stated. No arrangement has yet been come to for giving effect to the revision of salaries recommended by the Royal Commission.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Great Western Railway Company have yet signified their intention of returning to their old milk rates pending further inquiry; and, if they have not done so, whether he will urge upon the company to follow the example of the other great companies who have for the present returned to their old milk rates, if the new rates are in excess of the old rates?

The General Manager of the Great Western Railway Company states that although (in order to establish uniformity of charge) the milk rates have been slightly raised in some few instances, the general effect of the revision undertaken by the company is that in almost every case there is either a reduction or the rate does not exceed that in operation prior to the 1st January last. The company, he adds, will suffer a substantial loss of revenue from their milk traffic. I shall be willing to receive any specific complaints, and to call upon the company for an explanation.

Arising out of the answer given by the right, hon. Gentleman, I would like to ask him if he has observed that no promises to return to old rates have been made by any railway company without qualification or without reservation.

I hardly think that is so. On the whole revision, we are told in this case the rates will be considerably lower, and that statement is made without qualification.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, after the Second Reading of the Registration Amendment Bill, he intends to move that it be referred to the Standing Committee on Law, or to any other Committee?

Yes, Sir; it is my intention.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the fact stated that the Returns received by the Foreign Office show that the new French Tariff has caused losses to English trade of 800,000,000 francs on woollens; 4,500,000 francs on cottons; 400,000,000 francs on silks; 14,000,000 francs on raw wool; 3,000,000 francs on raw skins; 3,000,000 francs on cotton yarn; and 6,000,000 francs on jute, and that French exports to this country have increased during the past 12 months at the rate of 48 per cent.; and what steps, if any, he proposes to take to counteract this result to British trade.

The figures stated are correctly quoted from Sir J. Crowe's Report, and from the French Official Returns as regards the imports into France from the United Kingdom. The ton. Member, however, has omitted to mention increases enumerated by Sir J. Crowe, amounting to 26,000,000 francs. As to the exports from France to the United Kingdom, the increase has not been, as stated by the hon. Member, 48 per cent., but 48,000,000 francs, which equals 4.7 per cent. How far these changes are the result of the application of the new French Tariff is, of course, a matter for discussion.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the crews of the strange trawling steamers in Clew Bay openly defied the Coastguards when overhauled for their late depredations on the native fishermen's nets and skillets; whether a gunboat will be sent to these waters for the enforcement of the Law, as has been often done for the carrying out of evictions; who is bearing the expense of defending before the Privy Council the bye-law passed by the Inspectors of Fisheries, prohibiting trawling within Clew Bay in the early months of the year; and whether he will advise the Inspectors of Fisheries to appear before the Privy Council themselves in support of the bye-law which they deemed necessary to frame for the protection of these important Fisheries?

The Inspectors of Fisheries state they have been informed by the Coastguard Officer that the crews of the steam trawlers referred to did not act as alleged. When the bye-law has received the approval of the Privy Council it will no doubt be desirable that a gunboat should be employed, if necessary, to enforce the provisions of the law during the early months of the year. The Inspectors inform me that they have no funds at their disposal out of which to defray the expenses of witnesses who may be examined before the Privy Council in such cases. The Inspectors never produce witnesses before the Council in support of a bye-law, but one of their number will attend the hearing of the Appeal in the present ease with that object.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether these "strange" trawlers are not Scotch trawlers?

Are we to understand when the Inspectors of Fisheries make a bye-law acting under their statutory authority, and it is appealed against to the Privy Council, there are no funds out of which the Inspectors can defend their bye-law. Is that absurd condition of things to continue?

What their powers may be I cannot say, but I will inquire.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also inquire whether the prevention of steam trawling on the Scotch coasts is not the cause of the Scotch trawlers coming into Irish waters. Why should we be allowed to have the backwash of the Scotch trawlers?

Could not the right hon. Gentleman instruct the Law Officers of the Crown in Ireland to defend the bye-law before the Privy Council?

I can only repeat that I think this is a proper thing to be inquired into.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether amongst the matters now being considered by the Railway Companies are included the practical protection of imports by means of favourable through rates calculated at a much lower ratio per mile than is levied upon native produce in all parts of the Three Kingdoms; whether foreign Railway Companies are equally liberal in their dealings with exports from Great Britain and Ireland; and whether it is Intended to adopt a minimum mileage speed in the transit of live stock, and to restore free passes to the drovers thereof?

No, Sir, I am not aware that the Railway Companies have any such policy under their consideration. Their action as regards foreign merchandise is controlled by the 27th section of the Railway and Canal Traffic Act of 1888, which provides—

"That no Railway Company shall make nor shall the Court, or the Commissioners, sanction any difference in the tolls, rates of charges made for, or any difference in the treatment of home and foreign merchandise in respect of the came or similar services."

I have no reason to believe that a minimum mileage speed for the transit of live stock or any other merchandise is in contemplation or indeed would be useful. I trust that the concession of free passes to drovers accompanying live stock, which has been restored by some Companies will be restored by all.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury how many out of the 1,448 eases which came before the Irish Board of Works for increases of rent in respect of the Lough Erne drainage, were in respect of holdings upon which judicial rents were not fixed; how many in respect of holdings upon which judicial rents have been fixed; what were the reasons in the 291 cases in which the Board declined jurisdiction that it did so; is there any objection on the part of the Board to lay upon the Table of the House the details of the expenditure of £210,000, £106,000 of which is in excess of the Estimate, and what is the reason why the accounts of this import ant work have not been published as by law prescribed; and whether, having regard to the expenditure of £106,000 over the Estimates, and the fact that no detailed accounts as prescribed by the statute have been published, the Treasury will consent to a sworn inquiry respecting the expenditure in excess?

Judicial rents had been fixed for 703 of the 1,448 holdings mentioned. The Board of Works declined jurisdiction (1) where judicial rents were fixed after the completion of the works, February 1887; (2) where cases were still under the consideration of the Laud Commission for fixing judicial rents; (3) in cases withdrawn he the proprietors at the time of hearing. The Board of Works is in no way bound or required to keep or publish any detailed accounts of expenditure; but the accounts have, as a matter of fact, been published by the Local Drainage Board, and I consider that no useful end would be served by laying the detailed accounts on the Table or by a sworn inquiry.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether a Memorial has been received from the inhabitants of the Four Mile House (County Roscommon) postal district, pointing out the inconvenience they experience from the present system of delivery and collection of letters; and whether he will make arrangements to insure a more frequent delivery in the district?

A Memorial on this subject has been received within the last few days, and is now being inquired into. I will communicate the result of the inquiries by letter to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the scene at Bodyke on Friday last, when a large force of police were engaged in carrying out seizures for rent on the estate of Colonel O'Callaghan; whether, in view of the fact that there is great difficulty in meeting the landlords' demands in this district, the Government will appoint a Commission to inquire into the relations between the landlord and tenants, with a view to ascertaining whether it would be advisable to bring about some reduction in the judicial rents; whether he is aware, on the occasion of the seizures at Bodyke, the emergency men presented loaded rifles at the faces of several people, and entered the premises of Pat Halloran, of Kilnoe, and shot his dog, and also broke into the house of Michael Doherty, National School teacher, and broke windows and doors, although his place was not on the O'Callaghan estate at all; whether he is also aware that the emergency men seized, aided by the police, 32 sheep belonging to John Malone, and not on Colonel O'Callaghan's estate; and whether the Government will take steps to prevent these acts of provocation by men engaged in the interests of the landlords at Bodyke?

I am informed that no seizures were made or attempted on Friday, the 17th inst.; but that on the following day a force of 30 men was assembled to protect the special bailiffs in executing Civil Bill processes on the estate mentioned for non-payment of rent. It appears that when the agent and bailiffs had made a seizure a knife was drawn upon the agent, and the latter to protect himself presented his rifle at his assailant. It is true that a dog belonging to Patrick Halloran was fired at by a bailiff, though I am informed this was done after the dog had been set on the cattle to prevent their being driven off. The seizing party visited the house of Michael Doherty, school teacher, who is reported to be a tenant on the estate, though not actually residing on it, and one of the bailiffs entered his house through an open window without doing any damage. It is a fact that the bailiffs seized a number of sheep belonging to John Malone. As regards the second paragraph, I am afraid I can add nothing to what I have slated in reply to previous inquiries on the general question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be kind enough to answer that portion of the question in which I ask if the Government will take steps to prevent these acts?

I have already answered a similar question. We do not propose to appoint a Commission. Whatever action may be necessary we shall take upon inquiries made by ourselves.

That is not the question. I want to know if the Government will take any steps to prevent acts of provocation by emergency men such as entering the house of the man Doherty, where they had no earthly right to go?

I cannot say whether they had a right to go there or not. I rather understand that they consider they had. As to the steps we may take to prevent acts of provocation by emergency men we must judge the circumstances as they present themselves.

Has the right hon. Gentleman information as to the conduct of the emergency men? Do I gather that he has obtained it from the Police Authorities?

I am not aware of any other source from which I could obtain it, and on which I could rely.

In consequence of the answer I have received I shall consider it my duty at the proper time on the Estimates to call the attention of the House to the sending of large forces of Police to try and collect rents—which right hon. Gentlemen have admitted the tenants cannot pay.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that great distress prevails in Rosscarbery, County Cork; and, if so, whether the Government will make a grant in order to carry out the Rosscarbery and Clonakilty Railway, so that employment may be given and a useful public work carried out? On the same subject I will also ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been called to the following resolution passed the other day by the Clonakilty Board of Guardians, calling on the Government to take immediate action and open up some reproductive works in the Rosscarbery District, as, owing to the almost complete failure of the potato crop last year and the closing of the Benduff quarries, the people are in extreme poverty verging on starvation; and whether, in view of the very serious distress in Rosscarbery District, the Government will consider the necessity for taking some steps to protect the people?

In reply to these questions I have to say that I am informed by the Local Government Board that their Inspector, having made careful inquiry into the condition of the Rosscarbery District, is of opinion that there is no exceptional distress at present in this locality. The Inspector also states that the amount expended in out-door relief in the district during the past week-was considerably less than that expended in the corresponding week last year. It is true that some of the men thrown out of employment by the closing of the Benduff quarries are still unemployed, but the Inspector reports that there is a demand for labour in other parts of the union. With regard to the question of a railway between Rossearbery and Clonakilty, I have no doubt that such a work would be of great benefit to the district. I regret, however, there are no funds available out of which to undertake the line.

How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile the Report of the Inspector with the unanimous Resolution of the Board of Guardians calling on the Government to do something to meet the existing exceptional distress?

There is evidently a difference of opinion; but the Inspector has made a very full Report, and I accept what he says.

Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to say from whom the Inspector obtained his information, and upon what he bases his statement that there is no exceptional distress?

I am afraid I cannot say that. I understand he made very diligent inquiry.

With reference to the last question as to the Bodyke seizures, will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last paragraph, which, no doubt, he overlooked?

Order, order! I do not think we can go back.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that it was stated in Renter's telegram of the 20th March that the Indian Government was about to issue a loan for three crores of rupees to be raised in India, and that the amount of the Council bills for the financial year 1893–4 would be £18,700,000; whether he is aware that there was no quotation for bar silver in the London bullion market on the day on which the aforesaid telegram appeared; and whether he will call the attention of the Indian Government to the above coincidence?

Yes, Sir; but it should be added that the Budget contemplates a loan in England of £ 1,300,000 in order to discharge railway debentures falling-due in 1893–4; and that the increase of £1,700,000 in the Council bills to be sold in 1893–4 is caused by the fact that the net withdrawals from the cash balance by guaranteed Railway Companies are expected to exceed by £1,726,300 the net amount withdrawn by them in the current year. The answer to the second part of the hon. Member's question is "Yes." The Secretary of State has no doubt that the Government of India are aware of the facts referred to.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the Report of Lord Herschell's Committee is likely to be before the House?

I continue to make inquiries, but receive no intimation as to the probable date.

Did I understand aright that the Indian Government propose to raise a loan of three crores of rupees?

Yes, Sir.

And is the loan to be applied to what is considered capital expenditure, or will any part be applied to payments usually paid out of current taxation, during the present or coming financial year?

I shall be obliged if my hon. Friend will give notice of that question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether it is the case that under 5 & 6 Viet. c. 35, Schedule A, Section 61, power is taken to assess for Income Tax the premises occupied by bon¢ fide officials and servants of hospitals and other charitable institutions, even where such premises form part of the main building, and the salaries of such officials and servants, when exceeding £150 per annum, are separately assessed for Income Tax; whether, in fact, it has been the practice to assess on such premises; and whether he will consider the expediency of providing for their exemption?

The Act referred to by the hon. Baronet grants allowance of the duties charged, under Schedule A of the Income Tax, on any hospital, &c, in respect of the public buildings and premises belonging to it, and not occupied by any individual officer whose whole assessable income, however arising, amounts to £150. It has been, and is, the practice to limit the charge to the annual value of the premises so occupied, and to let the rest go free, and I do not see any ground for altering that practice.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received any communication from Mr. J. Keith with respect to the railway rates between Scotland and London; and whether Mr. Keith has expressed himself satisfied with the small reduction promised?

I have received a letter from Mr. Keith, from which it seems that he is not satisfied. His case has been fully heard under Section 31, and the Board of Trade has secured for him a reduction from 41s. 8d. per ton to 35s., or over 16 per cent. below the rate of last year. This brings the rate down to 3s. 4d. per ton per mile in consequence. The Conciliation Clause cannot be administered on the principle that the complainant must always be satisfied with the result, whatever the circumstances may be.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the laud cases from the Carrick and the Killybegs districts of Donegal have been fixed by the Chief Commissioners for hearing at Strabane in April; and whether, having regard to the poverty of the tenants in the Canuck and Killybegs districts, whose cases are set down for hearing at Strabane, and the great expense and hardship entailed on those tenants by being compelled to travel a long distance from their homes, arrangements can be made for the sitting of the Land Commission Court at Carrick or Killybegs for the hearing of land cases arising in these districts?

It is a fact that cases from the districts of Carrick and Killybegs have been fixed for hearing at Strabane next month, and I understand from the Land Commissioners that as the fair rent appeals have now become very scattered, it would be impossible to hold sittings in every district. The Commissioners state, however, that although in the present instance it would not be practicable to hold a sitting in either Carrick or Killybegs, yet they hope to be able to arrange to have the cases from these districts heard at Donegal on a special day in April to be fixed for the purpose. This will materially diminish the distances the tenants will be compelled to travel, and will obviate their being detained away from their homes.

; I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Dublin Port and Docks Board under their Rules admit the importation of manufactured articles free, especially a great quantity of foreign joinery, whilst the raw material is heavily taxed; and whether, in view of the discontent engendered amongst Irish workmen, who state they have previously complained of this bounty system to importers, he can hold out hopes that some remedy will be found for the present state of things?

I am inquiring into this matter, and shall be glad if the hon. Member will repeat the question on Monday.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the applications under the Redemption of Rent (Ireland) Act made by the 10 tenants on the M'Cartney Estate, near Belfast, whether he will give the gross valuation of the farms as reported by the Court Valuer, Mr. Hume Babington, and also the gross valuation of same as afterwards reported by the Court Valuer, Mr. Adamson, and, as these applications came before the late Mr. Commissioner M'Carthy, will he state why they wore taken up by Mr. Commissioner Lynch, instead of by Mr. M'Carthy's successor; what is the date of the transfer of the proceedings to Mr. Lynch's Court; and on whose application was the transfer made?

The Land Commissioners report that as the applications under the Redemption of Rent Act, on this estate are still sub judice, it would be irregular to give the information asked for in reference to the contents of the Reports made by the Assistant Commissioners. The cases were transferred to Mr. Commissioner Lynch on the 23rd December last, upon the fiat of the Judicial Commissioner made pursuant to the 4th of the General Rules of 23rd April, 1892, under the Act mentioned. The transfer was not made upon the application of any person.

May I ask why it was that the first Valuer sent down by the Commissioners gave notice of the object of his visit, while the second did not, but in some cases stated that he was merely checking the figures of the former Valuer?

I will call attention to the fact.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether it was by the orders or with the knowledge of the County Inspector or the Executive that some members of the Constabulary attended the Unionist meeting at Seaforde, County Down, the week before last, and the Unionist meeting at Dunmore, in the same county, on 13th March?

The Constabulary have no special orders to attend these meetings. If they went to this one it was because patrol duty took them there.

Are not these meetings got up by a few landlords with the object of intimidating this House by way of threats?

If the police say they had orders to attend the meeting it is not correct?

I have said no orders were given.

Is there any reason why the police should not attend?

I repeat no orders have been given.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has read the letter of the Liverpool Steam Ship Owners' Association, representing the Cunard, White Star, and other great ocean lines, which appears at page 21 of the recently issued Return on Lighthouse Illuminants, and the Report of Captain Bragg to which they refer, respecting the performance of Mr. Wigham's new lighthouse gas light and giant lens, wherein it is stated that the adoption of such a light as the Giant Lens Lighthouse Light and a powerful fog syren on the Old Head of Kinsale would materially increase the safety of the navigation to the mail steamers and other vessels which have to make Queenstown a port of call; and whether he will direct the attention of the Commissioners of Irish Lights to it, and to the large amount of corroborative testimony which the Return contains, with the view of their carrying out the request of the Liverpool Steam Ship Owners' Association, and others, that the Giant Lens Lighthouse Light may be placed upon the Old Head of Kinsale?

Yes, Sir; I have read the letter referred to in the first paragraph, and a copy of the correspondence has been sent to the Irish Lights Commissioners. It is not the province of the Board of Trade to initiate expenditure out of the Mercantile Marine Fund, or to favour the claims of one inventor in preference to those of others. If the Commissioners make a proposal to me, in the statutory manner, I will take care that it is fully considered.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the improvements in the light at the Old Head of Kinsale, being the substitution of a ten-wick burner in lieu of a four-wick, and the fog signal which the Board of Trade, in their letter of the 2nd November last (Parliamentary Paper No. 92, 1893, page 24), informed the Liverpool Steam Ship Owners' Association they had sanctioned, are to be considered as an adequate satisfaction of the requirements of such Association, as stated in their letter to the Board of the 24th October, 1892; and whether the Board of Trade will move the Commissioners of Irish Lights to take stops to remedy the still existing defects of which the Liverpool Steam Ship Owners' Association complain, by the adoption of the suggestions of their adviser, Captain Bragg?

This is a matter for the discretion of the Commissioners of Irish Lights. As I have already stated, in my answer to the hon. Member for South Tyrone, if the Commissioners make a proposal in the statutory manner I will take care that it is fully considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the treatment of the Rev. Mr. Eagar, Protestant Rector of Killorglin, County Kerry; whether he is aware that a man residing close to the Rectory laid claim to and took possession of a field belonging to the Rector, on the ground that his grandfather occupied it 40 years ago, and that, on being remonstrated with by Mr. Eagar, he threatened to shoot him; that, after this man's conviction at the Killorglin Petty Sessions, threatening notices were posted on Mr. Eagar's gate and hall door; that the men employed to plough up the field were threatened and forced to leave; and that Mr. Eagar, an old man of 80 years of age, is now boycotted; and what steps the police are taking in the matter?

As regards this question and that of which notice has been given by the hon. Member for South Antrim for Monday next on the same subject, I am informed that it is a fact that a man named Russell has laid claim to a field belonging to the Killorglin Rectory on the ground that it had been rented by his father 40 years ago; he has not, however, obtained possession of it. Notices were posted in January tolling Mr. Eagar not to sow Russell's field, and warning one of Mr. Eagar's workmen not to work for him. It is not a fact that Russell threatened to shoot Mr. Eagar when remonstrating with him, but some children of Russell's appear to have threatened Mrs. Eagar, who, however, did not proceed against them. The conviction at Killorglin Petty Sessions was on the 3rd inst., and was subsequent to all the notices. It was for trespass of cattle belonging to Russell in another field of Mr. Eagar's. One man usually employed by Mr. Eagar has refused to sow the field in dispute, but the work has been done by others, and to this extent only is Mr. Eagar boycotted. No one has yet been made amenable for the threatening notices.

Is not Mr. Eagar actually under police protection?

No, but I understand he is carefully watched; constant personal protection is not deemed necessary. The feeling is not so embittered as the question indicates, because a cow of Russell's having been seized in default of the payment of the fine, Mrs. Eagar magnanimously paid the amount of the fine and returned the animal to Russell.

Will these facts appear on the official record?

If they come within the proper category they will so appear. No change whatever has been made in procedure in these matters.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the number of compassionate allowances or special pensions which will be granted to soldiers who served in the Crimean and Indian Mutiny Campaigns and are now infirm; and whether it will be sufficient if they are in necessitous circumstances, although not in such destitution as to require parish relief?

What steps are being taken to make known the fact of these pensions being available for soldiers?

Judging from the number of applications received they are pretty well known. The number of additional pensions of this class to be awarded is at present under consideration. As regards the degree of destitution which will qualify for a pension I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply I made to one of his questions on February 9—namely, that though the word scarcely admitted of a general definition, it would be interpreted in a humane spirit by the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital according to the merits of each case.

Will the right hon. Gentleman withdraw the word "destitute," which is in itself offensive?

Certainly, if the hon. Member will give me a better term.

Why not substitute the words "in necessitous circumstances."

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the Report of Her Majesty's Inspector of Mines on the colliery accident at Ravens-lodge Colliery, Dewsbury, was presented to Parliament; and whether he is aware that the annual Reports of all Her Majesty's Inspectors of Mines are presented to Parliament; and, that being so, will he reconsider his decision as to the Report of the Inspector on the accident at New Battle Collieries, Midlothian?

The Report to which my hon. Friend refers in the first paragraph was a Report made by the Inspector upon the public inquest which was held after the accident. The Reports referred to in the second paragraph are public Reports prepared for the information of Parliament. It would, in my opinion, be undesirable and greatly hamper the freedom of the Inspectors, if the Secretary of State were unable to receive a Report from the Inspectors on any individual case, without it being in, his discretion to say whether it should be communicated to Parliament or not. I must adhere to my decision with regard to the accident at New Battle Collieries.

I beg to give notice I shall call attention to this matter on the Vote on Account.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether there is any precedent, and, if so, what, for the appointment of a paid Vice President of the Legislative Council of Malta, and" for the payment of his salary out of the Maltese Civil List?

There is no precedent for the appointment. It is a newly created office. Her Majesty's Government have been fortunate enough to secure the services of Sir Adrian Dingli, and his selection for the post has been generally approved in Malta.

I bog to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies under what agreement with the French Government part of the Cyprus Tribute is assigned or paid to Turkish bondholders in France?

There is no "agreement" with the French Government; but the money in question is paid to them in accordance with the legal principle that, if this country appropriates the surplus revenue of Cyprus to meet the liabilities of the Porte, France should be allowed to participate in the appropriation, as being one of the parties in whose favour the charge was made upon the general revenues of the Porte in case of default.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether it is the intention of the Government that in future the Fishery Board for Scotland shall only receive an annual grant of fixed amount instead of its annual expenses being borne \ on the Estimates as hitherto; whether frequent complaints have been made that the Board's executive functions, particularly as regards sea police, are inadequately discharged owing to want of funds; whether these executive functions, especially as regards the regulation of trawling, have recently been extended; and whether, in view of the fact that a fixing of the grant will prevent the proper exercise of these extended powers and stop any future extension of these and other powers, he will reconsider his decision to limit the grant?

The Fishery Board, under the Bill of the Government, will receive a fixed grant and the Brand Fees, which, as I will explain when I introduce the Bill, will place the Board in a better financial position than at present. There are, and always have been, complaints of insufficient protection to the fisheries. The increase in that protection has in past years come from the Admiralty, and the claim of the Scottish Fisheries on the Admiralty will not be affected by the Bill. When the hon. Member has heard my statement I think it possible, and indeed probable, that he will approve the financial proposals of the Bill.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will take steps to secure the allocation of a small portion of the grant for the Chicago Exhibition to the representation there of Irish cottage industries; and if he is in a position to state how much of the total grant has been devoted to Irish industries?

The Royal Commission having received the grant under the condition that they were to have the sole control of the expenditure, I am afraid that I am not in a position to supply information as to details; but I have no reason to believe that the announcement made by the late Attorney General on May 26, 1892, respecting the representation of Irish industries at the Exhibition is not being fully acted upon.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether persons registered in the books of the Bank of England as holders of British Government Stocks enjoy the same right to compensation, in case of loss arising through a forged transfer or forged power of attorney, as investors in the stocks of companies which have adopted the provisions of the Forged Transfers Acts, 1891–2?

On the question itself, the rights to compensation are not the same. One class of persons has statutable rights under the provisions of the Forged Transfers Acts, the other has well-known rights defined by Common Law and a series of cases. The liability of the Bank of England towards a purchaser of Consols is not defined by Statute, and with Stocks transferable in books, such losses as occurred to purchasers of Railway Stocks in the well-known Barton Case are practically impossible. As a matter of fact, no purchaser of Consols has ever had to complain that what was delivered to him was anything else than what he bought, nor has he ever had to defend his right to the Stock which a broker has caused a dealer to transfer into his—the purchaser's—name.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has caused inquiries to be made among the Coroners of Great Britain as to the number of deaths caused by revolvers; and if so, whether he will communicate the result of those inquiries to the House?

Yes, I have caused such inquiries to be made, and have received a good deal of useful information from Coroners in England and Wales to whom application was made. I hope that all the replies to my Circular will be in shortly, and then, the information being complete, the question of laying it on the Table of the House will be fully considered.

Will the right hon. Gentleman obtain information, not only as to the deaths, but as to the injuries inflicted?

It is much more difficult to get authentic information as to the injuries.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman get the Returns of cases tried in Court in which injuries were inflicted with revolvers?

I will consider that.

Can similar Returns be obtained for Ireland?

That is a question for the Chief Secretary to answer.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to a statement of the Samoan correspondent of The Sydney Morning Herald, 11th February, that the British man-of-war Daphne put in at Apia on 25th January, having on board a person deported from Honolulu for having caused political trouble there; that an attempt was made to land this person, but was abandoned owing to the opposition of the British and United States Consuls, and that thereupon the Daphne left for Fiji with the intention of lauding her prisoner there; whether any official intelligence of these events has reached the Admiralty; and, whether the captain of a British man-of-war is justified in conveying on his ship a political prisoner from Hawaii into exile.

The Admiralty has not received any such information, and nothing is known about the statement at the Foreign Office, where inqury has been made.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government has received any official confirmation of the statement of the Samoan correspondent of the Sydney Morning Herald, 11th February, that Baron Cederkranz, Chief Justice of Samoa, had petitioned the King of Sweden, by whom he had been appointed under the provisions of the Berlin Treaty, for permission to return to Sweden, as he was convinced that the aforesaid Treaty was utterly unworkable.

Baron Cederkranz is understood to have intimated to the Swedish Government his intention of resigning his post, but we have no information of his having addressed a Petition to the King.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the New Education Code was laid upon the Table on 27th February, but was not issued to Members till 22nd March, and that the month during which the Code has to lie upon the Table before becoming law runs from 27th February with the result that Members have only five days instead of a month to challenge the provisions of the Code; what steps he proposes to take in the matter; and whether he will take care in future that the Code shall not be laid upon the Table in dummy before it is actually ready for distribution.

I regret the delay which has taken place under the distribution of the New Code. As in former years, full time will be given for its consideration, and no action will be taken on it by the Department until ample and reasonable time has elapsed from the date of its being issued to Members. Every effort will be made, as has been done in the past, that the Code shall be distributed as soon as possible after it is laid on the Table.

Has not a similar failure to present the printed copy occurred in reference to the County Carnarvon Scheme?

I do not see what that has to do with the question on the Paper. I told the hon. Gentleman the delay was due to the printers, and I am in no way responsible for it.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education how many now School Boards have been formed since the present Government came into office; and how many of such Boards have been created by the Education Department, acting under Section 12 of "The Elementary Education Act, 1870," without application by the electors of the district?

Thirty-one School Boards have been formed since the present Government came into Office. Ten of these have been created under Section 12, Sub-section 2, of the Act of 1870.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, in giving a general approval to the principle of a National Pension Scheme for teachers in Public parliamentary Schools, he contemplates the existence of an independent scheme for teachers under the London School Board; and, if so, whether he would regard the London scheme as competitive with or supplemental to the National scheme?

In giving a general approval to the principle of a National Pension Scheme for teachers in Public Elementary Schools, the Government had not in contemplation any independent partial schemes for teachers under individual School Boards, especially as the Select Committee of the House, appointed in 1891 to examine this question in connection with the Bill promoted by the School Board for London, recommended that that Bill should not be proceeded with.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of Mr. Francis Hitchcock, a distinguished graduate and ex-scholar of the University of Dublin, who was arrested by Sergeant Dempsey, 4th Royal Dublin Fusiliers, on Friday last, on the ground of being a deserter from the Army; upon what grounds and by what authority Sergeant Dempsey arrested Mr. Hitchcock; whether Mr. Hitchcock was discharged by a magistrate on the grounds that there was no evidence to support the charge; whether an inquiry will be held into the conduct of Sergeant Dempsey in effecting this arrest; and whether any compensation can and will be awarded to Mr. Hitchcock?

On the same subject may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been called to the Report, appealing in The Times of 21st March, of a prosecution of an alleged deserter, before the Chief Police Magistrate of the City of Dublin, dismissed on the ground of a complete mistake as to the identity of the person charged; and whether for the purpose of preventing such mistakes in future he will consider the desirability of recording the identity of recruits by means of the system of mensuration known and practised in France as anthropometry?

The facts stated appear to be correct. The regrettable incident is attributable apparently to mistaken zeal on the part of the sergeant in question, as to whose conduct an inquiry will be held under the Order of the Commander of the Forces in Ireland. I am not aware that there is any means of compensation in such a case. As to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Sheffield, I do not think that the system of measurements which may be useful in the case of criminals is at all applicable to soldiers.

May I ask whether, before the arrest in a case of this kind, the sergeant acts upon a warrant and sworn statement?

I am not aware, Sir. Perhaps the hon. and learned Member will be good enough to give notice of the question.

What is the authority on which a sergeant arrests a civilian?

I am not able to answer the question. I do not know whether a general authority is sufficient or whether he requires a special authority. If the hon. and learned Member will put the question on the Paper I will answer it.

Then I ask the right hon. Gentleman to explain what he means by a "general" authority?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has seen the statement in The Times telegram of 21st instant, with regard to the Behring Sea Fisheries; and whether he can state what are the present demands of Russia in the matter?

The statement made in the telegram referred to is in many particulars incorrect. The seizures of British vessels by Russian cruisers last year are still under examination, and the reply of the Russian Government has not yet been received. In reply to the inquiries made by Her Majesty's Government as to the course which the Russian Government intended to pursue in the coming season, the latter have stated that they had no desire to dispute the generally recognised rules as to territorial waters, but in view of the special circumstances caused by the modus vivendi already concluded between Great Britain and the United States, and pending a general International arrangement for the regulation of the seal fishery, they have proposed certain special and provisional measures for the protection of Russian sealing interests which are now under discussion between the two Governments.

Is it a fact that whatever the claims of Russia may be in her portion of the sea, they will be left entirely unaffected by the result of the arbitration now going on in Paris?

That is entirely another question of which I must have notice. I have nothing to add to the answer I have given to the question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Government are unable to carry out important improvements to lighthouses in consequence of the fund available for the purpose—namely, the Mercantile Marine Fund, having been exhausted by the repayment of a loan to Greenwich Hospital; and, if so, whether he will take steps to have the necessary money reborrowed, or to otherwise provide funds so that these improvements may be carried out?

The Mercantile Marine Fund is not in a prosperous condition, and it is impossible to accede to the demands made upon it by the General Lighthouse Authorities. The demands for new works have increased from £53,000 in 1891 to £109,000 in 1892–93, and £150,000 in 1893–94. The hon. Member is no doubt aware that the revenue of the Fund is derived mainly from Light Duos. In the present state of the shipping trade we are anxious, if possible, to avoid the raising of the Light Dues. The Fund is still indebted to Greenwich Hospital to the extent of £150,000, and we cannot increase the loan.

Cannot Parliament supplement the amount?

Parliament already votes £40,000 a year for it.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that in 1875 a Departmental Committee was, appointed by the Treasury to inqui into the system upon which the leg business of the Government was cducted; whether he is aware that first three Reports of the communicate dealing with the English Departments were published, and the salaries of the English Law Officers fixed, in accordance with the recommendations therein contained, but that the Fourth Report, which dealt with the Scotch Department, and recommended the raising of the salary of the Lord Advocate, was not published, and no action taken thereon; and whether, in view of the fact that the emoluments of the English Law Officers have been recently increased, he will take into consideration the inadequacy of the salaries of the Scotch Law Officers, as compared with the English and Irish Law Officers?

I believe there was such a Report some 18 years ago upon this subject, but the Government do not contemplate any change in the arrangements with reference to the Scotch Law Officers, which stand upon an entirely different footing to the question of the English Law Officers.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland what is the reason of the delay in delivering the Scotch Return on the classification and distribution of ratepayers?

The body of the Return is complete. A Summary is now being printed, of which the final portion is promised by the Crown Agent at the end of this week. There will remain an abstract of counties, which will complete the Return.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is the fact that the newly-elected Armenian Katholicos Khrimian is still detained at Jerusalem, and is prevented by the Turkish Authorities from prosecuting his journey from there to Etchmiadzin; whether such detention constitutes a violation of those portions of the 62nd Article of the Berlin Treaty, which provides that the freedom and outward exercise of all forms of worship are assured to all, and no hindrance shall be offered either to the hierarchical organisation of the various communions or to their relations with their spiritual chiefs, and that ecclesiastics, pilgrims, and monks of all nationalities travelling in Turkey hi Europe or in Turkey in Asia, shall enjoy the same rights, advantages, and privileges; and whether the continued imprisonment of the Archbishops of Marash and Zeitoun constitutes a violation both of the 61st and of the 62nd Articles of the Berlin Treaty?

No such information has reached the Foreign Office. The Archbishops were tried on charges of sedition. Irregularities are stated to have taken place in the conduct of the trial. Whether the stipulations of the Treaty of Berlin have been infringed thereby, and in what measure, can only be ascertained by a strict inquiry on the spot as to the mode in which the trial was carried on, and Her Majesty's Government trust that the Sultan will of his own initiative order such inquiry to be instituted.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the restrictions on the movement of cattle have been relaxed, and that in future cattle from Dublin dairy yards can be moved for sale into Thursday's market, and that country cattle can be moved into Dublin dairy yards without licence; whether cattle can be moved from Dublin dairy yards into the country; if he is able to say that he has satisfied himself that it is safe to relax these restrictions; and how long the Dublin district has been free from any outbreak of pleuropneumonia.

The restrictions on the movement of cattle have been relaxed, and fat cattle from the Dublin dairy-yards can now be moved for sale to Thursday's market for slaughter within the Dublin scheduled districts only. The movement of the cattle to and from the market must take place on license from the veterinary department and by a specified route; and they can only be brought to a separate portion of the market set apart for their reception. Country cattle can be moved into Dublin dairy-yards without license, but written notice of each such movement must be given to the police. Cattle cannot be moved from Dublin dairy-yards into the country—the restrictions on such movement have not been modified; but if no further outbreak occurs they probably will be relaxed about the 1st May. The veterinary department is satisfied that it is safe to relax the restrictions as above described. The Dublin district has been free from any outbreak of pleuropneumonia since the 26th September, 1892.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with respect to the arrest of three men (William Howell, William Bird, and Robert Burns) in Albemarle Street on Friday, 17th March, their being marched through the streets to Vine Street Police Station by three policemen and there charged with obstructing the footpath, then marched to Marlborough Street Police Court, where the magistrate dismissed them without any fine, was it legal to so arrest the men; is he aware that one of them (at least) was in the road when arrested; had the fact that they were carrying boards headed "Tailors' Strike" anything to do with the arrest; was there any ground for the statement made by one of the men before the magistrate that the arrest was prompted by some tailoring establishment in the locality; and can he state how long since were any sandwich-board men previously so arrested in that locality for obstructing the footpath, and what boards were they carrying?

The men were legally arrested (5 & 6 Will. IV., c. 50, s. 79) for wilfully obstructing the footway after being twice cautioned by the police. They were taken on foot in the usual way to be charged at Vine Street, and the police van having left earlier in the day they were then taken on foot to Marlborough Street Police Court, the rule being that when the police courts are open charges received during the day are to be at once referred to the police court of the district. Advertising boards are not allowed to be carried on the footway at all. After being arrested one of the men stepped on to the roadway. The arrest would, however, have been perfectly legal under the Act if made in the roadway. I have satisfied myself that there is no foundation for the suggestions contained in the third and fourth paragraphs. During the last four years 56 persons have been arrested under the Act in that locality (which includes the whole of the C Division). There were 44 convictions, the latest being in May, 1892.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman has had any conference with the men themselves?

I had no conference with the men themselves, but most careful inquiries have been made on the part of the police, and the statements may be absolutely relied on.

Then I respectfully ask the Home Secretary whether he will be willing to have a conference with the men, and whether he will allow the hon. Member for Durham and myself, who witnessed what took place, to be present at that conference?

It would not be a good precedent to have a conference with the men themselves, but I shall be glad to see the hon. Members and hear what facts they have to state on the subject.

I beg to ask whether, inasmuch as the decision of the magistrates was against the police, it was desirable that the inquiry should be made by them?

The question put to me was by what authority the police arrested these men, and for what offence. They are questions that must be within the knowledge of the police. It is obvious that the police must know whether the arrests were prompted or suggested. However, if any further fact can be urged, I shall be glad to have it communicated to me.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Merionethshire whether, in view of the fact that the inquiry instituted in 1891, in consequence of Mr. Henry Dann's Report upon the Lambeth Charities, revealed the necessity for an amalgamation of the Charities and the constitution of a publicly elected Board of Trustees, the Charity Commissioners have taken any steps to bring about the amalgamation as urged by the Vestry of Lambeth; and, if so, what causes the delay in the completion of the scheme; does the proposed scheme, if any, include the Hayles and Walcot estates; and, if not, why not; and, when may the publication of the scheme be expected, and will the local Governing Body (the Vestry) be permitted to offer any amendment to it?

For some time prior to the year 1891 the Charity Commissioners had promoted an amalgamation of the Lambeth Charities, with a view to their management by a representative body of Trustees. It was not, however, until 1891 that the necessary applications from the Trustees of certain of the Parochial Charities were received. In January, 1892, a draft scheme was published amalgamating all the minor eleemosynary Charities founded for the benefit of the whole parish. A draft scheme was published in January, 1892, and objections and suggestions thereon were received from the Vestry of Lambeth, which have been fully considered by the Commissioners. The scheme is now on the point of being established, after a careful revision in connexion with the representations made by the Vestry and others. The proposed scheme does not include the Hayle and Walcot Charities, because the Commissioners have not received the application from the Trustees of those Charities, upon which alone proceedings for their inclusion in the scheme can be taken. As has been already stated, the proposed scheme was published in the course of last year, and the Vestry of Lambeth have had full opportunities, of which it has largely availed itself, of offering suggestions for its amendment.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Lambeth Vestry objected to the scheme by deputation, and that they have received no reply to their objections?

The scheme has been duly published after careful consideration of the objections of the Vestry.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will say on what grounds he has made the statement as to the results of an inquiry into the management of the School of Musketry at Hythe, that the Commandant had been reprimanded; and, whether an official Report has been received from Hythe as to the following charges, which appeared in Truth of 3rd November, 1892, and what that Report stated as to the truth of them, namely, that the value of certain refuse was not credited to the men; that barrack damages were charged against the sergeants at the rate of 6d. per man per month; that large profits were being sweated out of the men; that the adjutant managed the canteen and audited his own accounts; and that pork was substituted for Government meat ration several days a week?

In my reply to the hon. Member for Northampton I inadvertently used a term which is technically incorrect. The commandant has not been reprimanded, but he has been censured. It seems hardly necessary to go into the detailed allegations contained in the article in Truth, some of which were exaggerated or unfounded; but the grave irregularities disclosed by the inquiry amply justify the action which has been taken.

By whom was the commanding officer censured?

By the Military Authorities.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Parish and District Councils Bill for Scotland before the Easter Recess?

Not before Easter.

Why not extend the principles of the excellent English Bill to Scotland?

If we have a Local Government Bill for Scotland it will be essentially Scotch.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the returning officer for the election of Guardians has the power to reject the nomination of a married woman who in respect of qualification is the same as though she were a widow?

The practice of the Local Government Board where the question has been raised as to the right of married women to be elected as guardians has been to decline to interfere with the decision of the returning officer. The question is one of law, and is of such importance that if there is to be any decision on the point the Board consider that it should be a decision of the High Court. If the Bill which I had the honour of introducing to the House on Tuesday is passed into law, the question will be finally settled, as by one of the provisions of that Bill married women will be qualified to be elected as Guardians.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland when the final Report of the actuaries appointed to investigate the condition of the Irish National Teachers' Pension Fund will be presented; what is the amount of the deficit; by what means it is proposed to restore the solvency of the scheme; and whether it is intended to hand over the administration of the fund to the proposed Irish Government?

The Treasury have the Report on the National Teachers' Pension Fund under consideration, and they expect shortly to be able to lay their decision upon it before the House. I am unable in the meantime to anticipate the decision or to state the exact amount of the deficiency. Eventually, of course, the Fund will be administered by the proposed Irish Government.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention was called to a meeting held on 25th September 1892, at Brade, near Myrosswood, in the County of Cork, for the purpose of denouncing Captain Townshend, of Myrosswood, for evicting a tenant, at which meeting the Rev. J. Lyons, Administrator, said that he expected the people of that locality had been sufficiently educated to know what their duty was on that occasion, and, knowing it, to act up to it; whether he is aware that, since the delivery of that Speech, Captain Townshend and his family have been subjected to constant annoyance, and that the women belonging to the family of the evicted tenant were recently bound over to keep the peace for molesting Captain Townshend and his mother and sister while going to church; whether he is also aware that letters and notices have been received by the blacksmiths who work for Captain Town- shend, and by a neighbouring shopkeeper who has supplied his servants with provisions, threatening them with death; and whether he is taking any steps to put a stop to this system of persecution?