I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland why the teaching of the decimal system does not begin in the public schools of Scotland until the Sixth Standard is reached, by which time the great majority of the children have loft school, while in England it is taught in the compulsory Standards?

No general desire has been expressed in Scotland for the extension of the teaching of the decimal system, and the recent suggestion to that effect from the Decimal Association was not received until the Code for this year had been revised. We have advised the Association to communicate on the subject with the School Boards, and the matter will be further considered at the next revision of the Code, when we understand what the opinion of the representative Educational Bodies may be.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he is aware that residents in important towns on the main South Wales line of the Great Western Railway have, in order to be in time for the 8.30 London morning delivery, to post their letters at an earlier hour than residents in many English towns nearly double the mileage distance from the Metropolis; whether he is aware that about two years ago the then Postmaster General admitted the necessity of improved postal facilities for South Wales, and promised to consider the matter at the first favourable opportunity that presented itself; and whether any, and, if so, what steps are being taken to remedy the grave inconvenience under which the public in South Wales is suffering? I will also ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that letters from the South-West of England arriving at Bristol soon after 12 p.m. are forwarded in Gloucester, and do not reach Cardiff, a little over an hour from Bristol by the direct route, in time for the first morning delivery; and whether he will make arrangements for having these letters conveyed to Cardiff through the Severn Tunnel instead of round Gloucester?

I am aware of the circumstances referred to by my hon. Friend in these two questions. The delays are due to the fact that there are no trains on the South Wales system of railways which would enable better postal arrangements to be made. The expense involved in providing special trains would be so serious that, although I am anxious to give effect to the wishes of the hon. Member, I do not see my way at the present time to press the subject on the Treasury.

Is there no power to refer questions such as those to arbitration?

I do not think the arbitration powers apply in such a case as this.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will sanction the relaxation of the last paragraph of Article 638, Royal Warrant, 1892, to admit noncommissioned officers who before 1st July, 1888, accepted and held appointments under Article 617, Royal Warrant, 1884, to the rank of quartermaster sergeant without necessarily obtaining a first-class certificate of education; and, if not, whether he will specially consider the cases of non-commissioned officers who have served 17 years and upwards?

The Article referred to applies only to non-commissioned officers serving as clerks, and it requires the possession of a first-class certificate of education as a qualification for promotion to the highest grade. I am advised that men in this position are useless unless well-educated; and that any relaxation of the Rule would be prejudicial to the Service. The Rule has been relaxed for four years, which has given ample time to non-commissioned officers who aspire to the rank of quartermaster sergeant to qualify for the position.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether a scheme for the improvement of the salaries and status of certain officers in the surveying branch of the Irish General Post Office was forwarded to the Treasury in November last; and what delays a decision, and when it is likely to be arrived at?

The matter is still under consideration by the Treasury, and no decision has yet been arrived at. With regard to the latter portion of the question, I must refer the hon. Member to the right hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary to the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether Infantry officers acting as Assistant Inspectors of Small Arms are qualified for promotion to Inspectorships, or whether these posts are reserved for Artillery officers; whether Lord Morley's Committee, while suggesting that the Inspectors should have passed through the Artillery College at Woolwich, proposed that the scope of the College should be widened so as to admit all officers who were candidates for scientific appointments; and whether facilities will be afforded to Infantry officers to enable them to qualify as Inspectors of their own arms?

Infantry officers acting as Assistant Inspectors of small arms are eligible for promotion to Inspectorships. The Committee on the Manufacturing Departments, over which Lord Morley presided, did recommend that the Artillery College should be opened to officers of all arms who were candidates for scientific appointments. I find that no steps in the direction of that recommendation have yet been taken; but I will look into the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the War Office has any information as to the intended use of aluminium in the equipment of the German Infantry soldier, with the object of reducing the weight carried by him by nearly 12 lbs.; and whether any steps in this direction are being taken by his Department?

I am informed that the German Infantry soldier, when fully equipped, carries a weight of nearly 69 lbs. Proposals are said to be under consideration for reducing this weight by about 11 lbs.; but only 2 lbs. 4 oz. of that reduction is to be effected by using aluminium. The only articles of British Infantry equipment in which aluminium could be substituted for the present materials are the water bottle and the mess tin; and these together only weigh 2 lbs. 2 oz., so that no great saving in weight could be looked for. Experiments wore made with aluminium in 1891; but the cost was held to be prohibitory.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Book of Instructions known as the Warehousing Code, at present in use in the Customs and Excise Services, was issued to these Departments; how many of its paragraphs have been superseded or altered by General Orders since its issue; and when a revised issue will be supplied to those Services?

The Instructions referred to were issued on January 1, 1885. Many paragraphs have been superseded or altered since then. A revised edition is being prepared, and, it is hoped, will be supplied in the course of the present year.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has seen The Irish Catholic, 6th May, 1893, and noticed a leader in which it is stated that Belfast is now on its trial, but that provided it resumes and continues good behaviour no one will be desirous to resort to extreme punishment, but that it might become a duty to recommend to the Catholic people of Ireland a course of action which would test their prosperity in a manner they might not like; and whether he proposes to take any action concerning this threat to Belfast?

I have read the article referred to by the hon. Gentleman. I do not sec what action could be taken by the Government in this matter, or, indeed, that any action is called for.

Does the right hon. Gentleman now see the reason why we do not wish to trust these people with the Government of Ireland?

I see nothing in the article to shake my confidence in them.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, in view of the facts that there are eight female telegraph learners in the General Post Office, Dublin, qualified and doing regular clerk's duties, although not appointed, that all passed the competitive examination in 1891, and that three outsiders who were over ago and did not compete were appointed, to the detriment of the others, will he explain why present vacancies are not filled by appointing those who entered the Service regularly; and will their appointments date as from last year, so that no injustice may be done them?

The facts are not as stated in the question. The number of telegraph learners is only five, not eight; only one, not, three, outsiders have been appointed; and when this appointment was made no one of the telegraph learners was qualified. At the present time there are no vacancies.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what is now the general rate of allowance per diem to County and District Inspectors Royal Irish Constabulary for forage for each Cavalry and Transport horse, why is this allowance, like that for stable requisites and repairs of saddlery, not paid to the men in charge of the animals, seeing that the men purchase the forage themselves, who are at present often out of pocket for a mouth, and are in some instances obliged to take repayment by instalments from the officers who draw the full allowance monthly, and do any officers make a profit on the business; are County and District Inspectors, who draw a yearly allowance of £50 for a private horse and £46 for a servant, permitted to convert the outhouses of the barracks where they are located into stables and carhouses; has this practice, apart from the sanitary objection, the effect of depriving the men who pay the rent of any place to store their provisions, which to their loss must be bought daily in small quantities; do County and District Inspectors draw a yearly allowance as rent for an office in addition to the rent for a house when they convert a room in the barrack into an office; and what was the result of the agitation of the officers about a year ago for an increase in their stationery allowance, and did they then look for similar treatment for men in charge of stations?

The allowance to the Royal Irish Constabulary for the forage of a troop horse is 1s. 8d. per diem, and of transport horses, and troop horses doing transport work, 2s. per day. The allowance could not, I am informed, be paid to the man in charge, inasmuch as the officer is held responsible for the provision of forage of the best quality. When forage is exceptionally cheap the horses may possibly be fed for less than the above rates; but, on the other hand, the Inspector General has invariably refused frequent applications for increase of the allowance when the cost of forage was exceptionally high. The Inspector General informs me that, in taking houses for barracks, great attention is given to sanitary matters and the conveniences of the men to be stationed therein; he has no reason to think that any encroachment or failure in these respects has occurred, as implied in the question; but if any instance of the kind is brought under his notice, or any case in which an officer has failed to pay for the forage of the horses in his charge—which would be a distinct breach of the Regulations—such cases will be promptly dealt with. County Inspectors receive an office allowance of 1s. per day, which provides for cleaning, fuel, and light, and also for the wear and tear of any office furniture, such furniture not being supplied by the public, but by the officer out of his own pocket. It is considered desirable that, as far as possible, offices should be placed in barracks, and the Regulations require that a barrack at a district headquarters should have a suitable office for the District Officer. In the very few cases, however, where this cannot be done, and the District Inspector is obliged to convert a room in his house into an office for the transaction of public business, he is allowed £10 per annum. The stationery allowance of Comity Inspectors was increased from £8 to £10, and that of District Inspectors from £2 to £3 per annum, in December, 1890. When applying for the increase these officers were not, I am told, in a position to make any application of the nature suggested; indeed, a strong point in their application was that the allowance to sergeants in charge of stations had been doubled, while they (the officers) had received no increase.

I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the statement made by the hon. Member for Wednesbury, in a speech delivered at a Primrose League meeting held at Wednesbury on 27th of April, that he (the hon. Member for Wednesbury) had had the privilege of doing something directly for the borough by influencing for a large firm an order from the Admiralty which would extend over five years; and whether he can give particulars of the contract referred to, and the grounds on which it was allotted in the manner described?

Before the question is put—I do not know what the motive is, but I presume it is personal to me, and suggests that I did something that was wrong—I should like to explain that, I certainly used all the influence possible to induce an Admiralty order being placed at Wednesbury; but I did not suppose that the influence of so humble an individual as myself would weigh with the Admiralty, although, as the order did go to Wednesbury, my constituents naturally think otherwise. But I do desire to repudiate altogether the suggestion that I used any improper influence; and, indeed, I do not for one moment think that the Admiralty would have been susceptible to any improper influence. I only did what I was strictly justified in doing.

The hon. Member for Wednesbury addressed a letter to the Director of Admiralty Contracts, in November last, requesting that favourable consideration might be given to a firm at Wednesbury who had tendered to supply chain cables for the Navy. Following the usual practice, the lowest tenders were accepted; and as that sent on by the firm alluded to was a tie with that of another firm, and these two were lower than the tenders of the other competing firms, the orders were divided between the two. The letter from the hon. Member had not the slightest effect in determining the acceptance of the tender.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has boon drawn to the fact that a leaflet which has been extensively distributed to parents of children being educated at St. Peter's School, Birkenhead, in which parents desiring perfectly free education for their children are recommended to copy out and sign an application to be forwarded to the Vice President, stating that they desire and cannot get schooling without fees; whether he has in consequence received any complaint as to the absence of free education at St. Peter's School; and whether he is aware that, as a matter of fact, free education is given at St. Peter's School to the children of all parents who ask for it, and that 400 children are being educated free there now; and, if so, whether he will take steps to put a stop to the circulation of such leaflets, as being calculated to injure the voluntary schools?

I have not seen the leaflet to which the hon. Member refers. The Department have recently received a large number of applications for free education from parents in Birkenhead, and have, in pursuance of their duty under the Act, made a very careful inquiry into the number of free school places available in the district. It appeared that, at the time of this inquiry, St. Peter's National School provided 346 free places, of which, however, only 40 were for older children, the remainder being for infants. I have neither the wish nor the power to put a stop to the circulation of any documents informing parents of their rights under the Act, nor do I suppose that it was the intention of Parliament, in passing the Act, that its provisions should be concealed from the persons whom it was meant to benefit.

Arising out of the question, may I ask if the right hon. Gentleman does not consider it his duty to stop the circula- tion of a leaflet which distinctly says that free schooling is not provided in voluntary schools, when, as a matter of fact, any parent can get it for his children if he only asks?

Judging from what appears in the question as to the contents of a leaflet which I have not seen, I can only say I see no objection to it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the expression "seaman" in Clause 6, Sub-section D, and in Clause 7, Sub-section 2, of the Employers' Liability Bill, is intended by the Government to include members of a crew of a fishing vessel, where such members are not part owners, but are joint adventurers with the owners, receiving no weekly wages, but being entirely dependent upon the risks of the adventure for their share of the profits; whether the expression "ship," in Clause 7, Sub-section 2, of the said Bill is intended by the Government to include sailing vessels engaged in the fishing trade, whore such vessels also carry oars; and whether he is prepared to accept Amendments to the said Bill, making it quite clear that the expressions "seaman" and "ships," respectively, are not so intended to apply?

The term "seaman" in the Employers' Liability Bill is unqualified, but the language of Clause 1 would only be applicable to such seamen as are in the service of an employer, and not to seamen who are co-partners in a fishing adventure. The answer to the second paragraph is "Yes," and with regard to the third, so far as I can judge, no Amendment is necessary in this respect, but I can express no opinion until I have seen the words in which a proposed Amendment is embodied.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India with regard to his recent statement that the number of officers of the Indian Telegraph Depart- ment had been raised to 86, and that for exceptional reasons the number of the staff had fallen to. 76, but steps are now being taken to raise them to 86, whether the Secretary of State is aware that in the last three years five officers have died and 21 have retired; whether these retirements occurred under the special provisions made in 1887, and were foreseen and provided for; and, if so, how; whether it is true that, out of a sanctioned strength of 84, there are only 74 officers in the Service, and of this number 16 or 17 are either absent on leave or about to take leave; that in three years six officers have joined from Cooper's Hill, three others have been transferred from the Indo-European Telegraph Department, and three upper subordinates have been promoted, while only two officers are now under provision from Cooper's Hill; whether, owing to the increase of work in the Department, the Government of India, before the hot season has set in, has intimated that no more leave can be granted; and whether it has been represented to the Secretary of State that there is danger of a breakdown among the officers owing to the extra work imposed on them?

The number of deaths, according to (he latest information, is six; of retirements, 19. The retirements were provided for in the reorganisation scheme of 1887, the annual number of appointments from Cooper's Hill being raised from two to three. The strength of the Department is 74 at present, of whom 11 are known to be on leave. The facts are correctly stated by the hon. Member except that, with the view of bringing the staff up to its full strength, the annual recruitment both in this country (as already mentioned) and in India has been increased. It has been necessary to refuse leave to officers of the Department; and to relieve the tension we are appointing five temporary officers from this country. The answer to the last question is, "No"; but the necessity of recruiting up to the full strength of the Department as soon as possible has been urged by the Government of India and is fully recognised by the Secretary of State.

In the absence of the hon. and learned Member for West Cavan, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to a pamphlet by Mr. Bourchier F. Hawksley and another, on "Companies limited by guarantee without nominal capital," and showing the advantages of such companies from the point of view of the promoter, inasmuch as, according to the statement of the authors,

"The shares may be issued at a discount, the promoters may themselves be Directors, and sell their property to the company without the interposition of an independent and intelligent judgment of the transaction,"

My attention has boon called to the pamphlet mentioned by the hon. Member. Twelve applications of the nature referred to have been made to the Registrar: Five of such companies have been registered, and the other seven applications have been refused upon instructions from the Board of Trade given on the advice of counsel. Legal proceedings against the Registrar in the case of one of the companies refused are now in progress; and, pending those proceedings, I think it better to express no opinion as to the future.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Waterford and Limerick Railway Company are charging 4d. per firkin more than last year for single firkins sent from Ennis to Cork and intervening stations?

I am informed by the Waterford and Limerick Railway Company that they have a large number of consignments of single firkins of butter by passenger train, and that the rates have not been advanced; they remain as they were in 1892. The hon. Member has been good enough to send me a delivery note; but it was a note of the Great Southern and Western Railway Company, and not of the Waterford and Limerick, and I am in communication with that company on the subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board when the London Equalisation of Rates Bill will be printed; and whether a full opportunity will be given before the Second Reading is taken for the Metropolitan Authorities to consider it?

I hope that the Bill will be circulated before Whitsuntide; perhaps by next Tuesday.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is any foundation for the statement that, in consequence of two new Police Courts being required for the Metropolis, the Marlborough Street Court, now extensively used for that part of London, is to be abolished?

I answered this question some time ago. There is no present intention of abolishing Marl-borough Street Police Court?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the amount of the Church property in Ireland which it is proposed in Clause 15 of the Government of Ireland Bill to give over to the control of the Irish Government?

Investigations made in 1890 have shown that there is a sufficient margin left between the charge on the Irish Church Temporalities Fund and the income to afford a good security for its liabilities. But it is not practicable to form an estimate of the capital value of the un appropriated residue, inasmuch as the annual income of the fund alters from year to year from causes beyond the control of the Government, such as the redemption of annual charges by moans of capital sums paid to the fund by those liable for payment, and similarly by the conversion of perpetual income into Terminable Annuities. A full description of the property of the fund will be found in the Report of the Irish Church Temporalities Commission for 1880 (C. 2,773 of 1880), and the charges upon the fund appear in House of Commons Paper, No. 130 of 1890, in regard to which the only appreciable change which has since arisen is in the first item, "The Church Loan," which has been reduced by about £750,000.

Do I understand the Chief Secretary to say that, in the opinion of the Treasury, there is an available surplus in the fund, which would be a sufficient margin upon which to make further advances?

That is not what I said. There is margin enough to meet outstanding liabilities. As to further advances, the answer might be different.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the Table a Return of the receipts and charges on the fund at the present moment?

I will inquire if that can be done.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the notification of last October limiting the right of trial by jury in Assam has been withdrawn?

The Secretary of State has been in communication with the Viceroy on this subject, and has ascertained that the Chief Commissioner of Assam has been instructed to withdraw the notification to which my hon. Friend refers.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General why a clerk named Dunford, employed in the Central Telegraph Office, was recently promoted over the heads of upwards of 400 of his colleagues, who were senior in date of appointment by, from one to eight years; and whether he is aware that this is the second time that Dunford has been promoted over the heads of others of longer service?

Mr. Dunford, in 1887, was selected by the Controller for special duties in the Controller's Office. The office in question has no separate classification; but the Controller selects from the general body of officers the best man he can find. In 1887 candidates were invited to offer themselves, and of those Mr. Dunford was selected as the most promising, and after two years' service in the Controller's Office was promoted to the first class. Last year the man standing immediately above Mr. Dunford in the Controller's Office retired on a pension; and Mr. Dunford, who stood next to him, was promoted in his room. On the general classification, Mr. Dunford's rotation number, counting from the top of his class, was not 400, but 283. It will be seen that Mr. Dunford's promotion in 1889, no less than in 1892, arose out of his selection for the Controller's Office, and this selection was determined by his superior qualifications.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether civil, military, and naval officials are allowed to use their leisure in working Co-operative Stores, and the said stores are permitted a lighter system of Income Tax Returns than that accorded to ordinary business firms; and whether the Government intend to propose a measure which will prevent officials, paid by the State, from taking part in the management of such Societies?

Co-operative Stores, like those known as Army and Navy and Civil Service Stores, are not treated more favourably in the matter of Income Tax than ordinary business firms. With regard to the remainder of the question, so far as it affects the Civil Service, I can only say that I am not prepared to recommend an alteration of the existing Rule on the subject, which I quoted on Monday from the Orders in Council relating to the Civil Service. I cannot answer for the Military and Naval Services.

Will the Government have any objection to appoint a Select Committee to inquire into the whole question, which is one of vast importance to the commercial community?

The matter has been fully considered by the Ridley Commission, and the late Government upon their Report came to the conclusion that it would not be desirable to interfere with the actions of Civil servants after office hours were over.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education what steps the Department have decided to take with reference to the opening of a new school at Norton Canes, Staffordshire; whether they have made inquiry into the circumstances under which the sanction of the School Board was represented to them as having been obtained, and has now been formally withdrawn; and what inquiries as to the legality of this alleged sanction by the School Board were made before the Department itself consented to recognise this school as one entitled to receive an annual grant?

The Norton-under-Cannock School Board wrote to the Department on the 19th April, stating that, at a meeting on the 17th, they had rescinded their previous resolution agreeing to the proposed school being put on the Annual Grant List by the Department. They have been informed that the Department cannot, on that account, withdraw from their undertaking to allow annual grants to the new school. There was nothing in the terms of the Board's original resolution which called for any inquiry by the Department, and the Board do not allege that it was passed in an irregular way.

Is it not the fact that the information sent to the School Board was given solely on the authority of the Chairman, and that the resolution passed in consequence was revoked? Is nothing to be done?

replied, that if any evidence of illegality were forthcoming it would be carefully considered.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the University College of Bangor is subsidised out of moneys voted by Parliament; and, if so, what is the amount of the annual grant; and whether he can inform the House what Ministerial Department is responsible for the Vote, and to whose account the grant, if approved by Parliament, is paid?

The Estimates for each year since 1884–5 have included a Vote of £4,000 to the University College of North Wales, Bangor, which will be found under Class IV., Head 7 (Universities and Colleges, Great Britain. The Treasury is the accounting Department for the Vote which includes this item, and pays it quarterly to the treasurer of the College. But the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education is the Minister who, as representing the Government in this House on educational matters, would defend the Vote or give explanations with regard to it.

May I ask if any Report will be laid before this House to show that the funds are properly administered, before the Vote is asked for?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put that question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works what was the cause of the temporary failure of the electric light on Monday night last; and whether the failure was the result of any defect of the apparatus within the precincts of the House, or whether it was due to any default on the part of the company which supplies the light?

The temporary failure of the electric light in some parts of the House on Monday last occurred in the case only of those lights supplied by the Westminster Electric Supply Company, and not in those connected with engines in the House. The failure was due to the melting by the electric current of one of the main safety fuses at the junction of the company's main cables with a main in the building. The current does not appear to have been abnormally strong. The fuse, therefore, which was originally supplied by the company must either have been originally too weak, or have been weakened by use. It is now proposed to replace it by one with a greater fusing margin.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the telegraph messenger boys are already drilled with the Martini carbine; and if he will state definitely when the Artillery Volunteers will be supplied will that arm?

It has been already stated that 23 corps of Artillery Volunteers have been supplied with Martini carbines, and that it is hoped that the remainder of the Force will be so supplied by the end of the present financial year. The arms which have been issued to the telegraph boys for the mere purpose of drill are unserviceable weapons, which cannot be fired, and which are not fit for either conversion or repair.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Enfield with which the troops are armed was obsolete in the days of Mr. Cardwell?

May I ask when these weapons were first supplied to boy messengers in the Telegraph Service; and whether the Post Office Authorities consider skill in the use of rifles as an essential part of the physical training which the present Postmaster General described as so beneficial to the boy messengers?

If my hon. Friend had heard my answer he would have learnt that the weapons issued to these boys axe unserviceable weapons, which cannot be fired. If any further particulars are desired my hon. Friend must put a Notice upon the Paper.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he can state the number of children in England and Wales of school ages (i.e., between 5 and 14) who were estimated on the 31st August, 1892, to be of the class usually found in elementary schools; how many of these were on the school registers on that day, and the increase since the adoption of free education; and whether he can supply a Return similar to that at the bottom of pages 8 and 9 of Return C. 6,984, lately presented to both Houses of Parliament, showing the increase in the number and percentage of scholars on the school registers at the different ages since the introduction of free education?

With regard to the hon. Member's first question, I cannot give any other information than that which is to be found on page 41 of the Return C. 6,984 The estimated number of children between 5 and 15 of the class usually found in public elementary schools at the middle of 1892 is there put down as 5,750,146. It is impossible to say how many scholars were on the school registers on any particular day, because the Returns are made up at the end of the school year for each school. The Returns for the schools inspected during the year ended 31st August, 1892, show that there were 4,489,041 scholars over five years of age on the registers, being an increase during the year of 126,913. If 50,000 of this is taken as due to normal increase of population, it, may be assumed that the effect of the Free Education Act had then been to bring between 70,000 and 80,000 children of school age on to the school registers. I shall be happy to supply a Return which will practically give the information as to increase in number and percentage of scholars which the hon. Member desires.

Do I understand that Papers will be laid on the Table without further inquiry?

If the hon. Member will move for them they will be granted.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many cartridges, loaded with cordite powder and nickel covered bullets, can be fired from the Metford regulation ·303 barrel, before the same becomes worn and unfit for accurate shooting?

From experience in the proof of ammunition the number of rounds which may be fired before the rifle becomes unfit for accurate shooting appears to be about 3,000.

Did I rightly understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that the rifle is worn out after firing 3,000 rounds. Is that at all a satisfactory condition of affairs?

I did not say it was then worn out. I said it became unfit for accurate shooting. If the hon. Gentleman wishes for further information will he put a question on the Paper?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the attention of the Secretary of State for India has been drawn to the Memorial of the Indian Association against Mr. E. W. Ormond's appointment to act as Second Judge of the Small Cause Court at Calcutta (an office carrying a salary of Rs.1,400 a month), and to an article giving in detail the facts of the case, both appearing in the May number of India; will he state what wore Mr. Ormond's judicial experience and qualifications which induced the Indian Government to appoint him Second Judge of the Small Cause Court, in which position he will have power to review the decisions of Mr. K. M. Chatter see, the present acting Third Judge, in all cases not exceeding Rs.500; and whether, in view of the fact that the number of Indian litigants is in excess of European litigants, and that one of the first two Judges is a European, he will consider the desirability, in the interests of Indian suitors, of appointing an Indian as the other Judge?

The Secretary of State has not seen the article mentioned in the question; he has, however, seen a Memorial, which is, no doubt, the one referred to, presented by the Indian Association to the Governor General in Council, who saw no reason to interfere with the discretion exercised by the Lieutenant Governor in appointing Mr. Ormond. The salary of Mr. Ormond as officiating Second Judge is Rs.700 a month. Before appointing Mr. Ormond, the Lieutenant Governor considered the claims of several barristers who were eligible for the post, and eventually selected that gentleman, who is a barrister of six years' standing and was believed to be in all respects well fitted for the duties of the office. As regards the rest of the question, there is nothing to add to the replies already given (on the 10th and 14th of April) to my hon. Friend, except that it is not the case that the Second Judge of the Court, sitting alone, can review the decisions of the Third Judge. The practice is that applications for a new trial or to set aside a decree are heard before at least two Judges, one of them being the Judge who tried the case, and the other, ordinarily, the Chief Judge. At the present time out of six Judges (including the Registrar of the Court, who disposes of many small cases under Rs.10), four are natives of India; and, in the circumstances, the Secretary of State does not intend to interfere with the discretion which the law gives to the Lieutenant Governor in this matter.

Arising out of the question, may I ask whether it is not the duty of the Secretary of State to make inquiries into any complaints that may be made as to race partiality on the part of a Government in India making appointments to judicial offices, and, if necessary, to redress grievances if they should be proved to exist?

Is it not the case that the act of superseding Mr. Chatterjee is viewed very unfavourably by all interested in India who are capable of judging Mr. Chatterjee's merits?

I have only to say that the conduct of the Lieutenant Governor in this case cannot reasonably be now taken into consideration. It is not for me, in dealing with this particular case, to pass any judgment upon him. As I have already said, in the present instance no case has been made out for the interference of the Secretary of State.

I beg to give Notice that I shall, on the Indian Budget, call attention to the failure of the Secretary of State to give effect to the Queen's Proclamation, which enjoins strict impartiality as regards race, caste, and creed.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture why "the wide prevalence of agricultural distress" referred to in the Queen's Speech has as yet received no consideration at the hands of Her Majesty's Government, and if, having regard to the long-continued drought, the absence of food for horses, cattle, and sheep, the depreciation of stock, and the prospect of a hay famine, no remedial or palliative measures are to be proposed; and why two months of legislative time have been allowed to elapse before the appointment of the Select Committee promised on the 16th of March last, to consider the desirability of enabling the public to detect imposition and to distinguish between British and Irish products and those of foreign countries by requiring the latter to boar a mark of their foreign origin?

It is not the case that the existing depression in agriculture has received no consideration at our hands. On the contrary, we have been only too glad to investigate the numerous proposals which have reached us on the subject; and in this connection we regret that we have not had the assistance of the Committee which we proposed to appoint, and in regard to which Notices still stand in the names of hon. Gentlemen opposite. With reference to the particular circumstances of the present moment to which the hon. Member refers, I should hope that the existing apprehensions in some districts owing to the absence of rain may yet be removed, and it is obvious that the possibilities of any Government action are but very small when difficulties are due to exceptional climatic conditions. With regard to the second paragraph of the question, it is scarcely for me to explain here the proceedings which have taken place in connection with the appointment of the Committee to which the hon. Member refers; but I understood that its constitution and the terms of the Reference have been the subject of constant communication amongst those concerned since its appointment was promised, and, as the hon. Member is aware, it has now been definitely appointed.

May I ask whether the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Agriculture has been called to the highly successful experiments in rain-making which have been carried out in certain parts of America; and whether he thinks it his duty to take any steps with a view to putting an end to the long-continued drought in this country by the adoption of the American method?

The subject has been brought to my attention, but I am informed that the experiments tried in the United States last year were not a success, and that the American Government are not granting any more money for the purpose. If the hon. Member or any other hon. Gentleman interested in agriculture would like personally to make some private experiments in the direction indicated I shall watch them with great interest.

I beg to ask, in connection with the appointment of a Select Committee, whether any communication has reached the right hon. Gentleman to the effect that many Members of the Opposition, although not believing in the adequacy of the Select Committee, would very much prefer the appointment of such a Committee to nothing being done at all; and that if the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to narrow the scope of the proposed Reference hon. Members on the Opposition side of the House would use their influence with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford (Mr. Chaplin) to induce him to withdraw his Amendment.

If the hon. Gentlemen opposite, referred to in the question, are able to prevail on their friends to withdraw their opposition to the appointment of a Select Committee, the Government will be glad to consider any suggestions that may be made as to the scope of the Reference.

Has the right hon. Gentleman given any consideration to the Amendment in my name on the Paper with regard to this particular point?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been drawn to the case of a farmer named John Hunter, who was sentenced at Magherafelt Petty Sessions, on 26th April, for assaulting a constable during the recent Ballyronan disturbance, to a month's imprisonment, and convicted upon the constable's sole evidence, without any corroboration, the Magistrate refusing leave to appeal; whether he is aware that Hunter's solicitor wished, to call witnesses, who, he alleged, could have proved conclusively that Hunter was not there at the time of the alleged assault, but the Magistrate did not hear them, and that affidavits of defendant's innocence have been sent through the solicitor to the Lord Lieutenant, and the names of two sureties willing to enter bail for £1,000 that defendant would appear at any time to take his trial again if liberated now; and whether any, and what, reply has been returned to this application?

Is it not a fact that the hon. Baronet and his Colleagues of the last Government invariably voted against giving a right of appeal in all these cases?

I cannot say that without notice. Hunter, I am informed, was sentenced to one month's imprisonment for deliberately and without provocation assaulting a policeman; no witnesses were called for the defence, although the defendant had been summoned a week prior to his conviction, and had, therefore, ample time to produce any witnesses he pleased. The decision of the Magistrates in this case was unanimous, and it is true that they decline to accede to the request of defendant's solicitor to increase the sentence with a view to an appeal. The Lord Lieutenant has had before him the Memorial with affidavits on behalf of Hunter, and has decided that the law must take its course. This decision was communicated to Hunter and his solicitor on the 4th instant.

What is the meaning of the suggestion in the question that a man who has been convicted should have a right to another trial if liberated now?

That is a matter which perplexes me.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether be is aware that a horse belonging to Mrs. Perry, of Fomerla, Tulla, the widow of Mr. Perry, who was murdered under circumstances of great brutality near Tulla, has been maliciously stabbed; and whether any motive has been assigned for the outrage?

I am informed that a horse belonging to Mrs. Perry, whose husband was murdered as stated in January, 1892, was maliciously stabbed between the 28th and 30th of April last, by some person at present unknown. The only assignable motive for this latter outrage is the recent dismissal of a man in Mrs. Perry's employment.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Council on Education whether he has received many complaints from agricultural districts as to the difficulty of finding bead teachers for small village schools, even though increased salaries have been offered; if he has any information to show whether the difficulty is largely owing to the fact that pupil teachers who have passed the Queen's Scholarship and have obtained a second class are no longer permitted to take charge of schools where the average attendance does not exceed 60; and whether he proposes to take any steps to meet the difficulty?

I am not aware that many complaints have been received in the Department of the kind stated. But I will make inquiries, and if I find that the difficulty is really serious I will endeavour to take steps to meet it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state the decision at which the Colonial Office has arrived in respect of the inquiry asked for by the elected Representatives of Dominica into circumstances of the recent shooting of the people at La Plaine; and whether an inquiry will be granted into the administration of the public loans, the taxation, expenditure, and general conduct of the Government of Dominica?

The Secretary of State has given his most careful attention to the late lamentable occurrences in Dominica. So far as we are already in possession of the facts of the case, there seems to be no necessity for instituting a special inquiry into these events. But the Governor has been called upon to furnish a full Report on the statements contained in the Memorial of the elected Members; and, further, he has been instructed to report fully and carefully on the grievances complained of by the people of La Plaine, so that action may be at once taken to remedy, where possible, any injustice or disability from which the people may be suffering.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any official Report has been received at the Colonial Office from the Governor of Dominica with reference to the recent fatal riots at La Plaine; whether the Governor of the Island and the Chief Magistrate, Mr. Le Hunte, were present when the police fired on the people, killing four persons and wounding two others; whether Mr. Le Hunte, who was in command of the police on the occasion, afterwards presided at the inquest on the victims; and, if so, what action will be taken with regard to that official; can he state the nature of the document which Sir W. Haines Smith and Mr. Le Hunte asked the man Collard to sign; and whether an inquiry will be instituted into the conduct of Sir W. Haines Smith and Mr. Le Hunte, and the circumstances which led to the disturbances?

The answer to the first question is, yes. As regards the second question, the Governor and Mr. Le Hunte were present when the firing took place. The police fired without orders, but under extreme provocation, and the Governor at once gave orders to cease firing. Mr. Le Hunte was not in command of the police on this occasion. He presided at the inquest as Coroner of the district. As regards the fourth question, the Governor offered to allow Pierre Colar to resume possession of his house, from which he had been ejected, if he would give an undertaking to pay the amount he owed for taxes and costs at some future time, if he were able and wore called upon to do so. On his refusal, the police proceeded to carry out the process. As regards the last question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I have just given to the hon. Member for West Kerry.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in the year ending 31st March, 1892, the sum of £518,241 18s. 11d. was received from light dues from shipping, that in addition thereto there was received the sums of £3,460 1s. 9d. and of £111 16s. 5d. or £3,571 18s. 2d. in all from unclaimed wages of deceased and living seamen, and the sum of £1,087 16s. 7d. for unclaimed wreck and salvage; whether, in all, there was received in the said year a total sum of over £522,000 directly derived from ships and sailors which was credited to the Mercantile Marine Fund; whether payments amounting to 142,543 5s. 11d. were made out of that Fund, not for the maintenance of lights, buoys, and beacons, but for salaries and expenses of Mercantile Marine Offices and Surveys; and whether it is proposed by Her Majesty's Government to continue to direct funds derived directly from ships and sailors to purposes not for their immediate benefit?

The figures quoted by the hon. Member are given in the published account of the Mercantile Marino Fund for the year ending March 31, 1892, to which must be added a grant of £40,000 made by Parliament. The salaries and expenses of the Mercantile Marine Offices and Surveys are charged to the Fund in pursuance of Act of Parliament; and I cannot agree with the suggestion of the hon. Member that ships and sailors derive no immediate benefit from the expenditure.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill to amend the law with respect to the liability of carrying companies to compensate the owners of live stock for injuries inflicted during transit and losses accruing from unwarrantable delay; and whether the proposed Board of Arbitration shall have the power to assess and levy the amount of damage caused by bruises, or deterioration arising from the want of proper accommodation or from the negligence of such companies or their officials?

I am advised that, under the Act of 1854, every Railway Company is liable for loss or injury to horses and cattle occasioned by neglect or default. A company must also deliver within a reasonable time. I do not know to what proposed Board of Arbitration the hon. Member refers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that we can never get a decision as to what a reasonable time is?

That is a question for the Courts to decide, having regard to the facts of each particular case.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he is aware of the great discomfort suffered by Members of this House from the insufficient ventilation of the Division Lobbies; and whether, to remedy this, he will cause either open gratings or swing windows to be placed over the doors in the Lobbies, instead of the present arrangement by which all fresh air is excluded?

I fear that occasionally when any large numbers of Members vote in the same Lobby there is discomfort from the want of fresh air as well as from overcrowding. The ventilation officers endeavour to meet this as far as possible by supplying an additional quantity of air; but, as this is not always a sufficient remedy, I have directed the attendants, when very large numbers of voters are expected, to open the windows before the Lobbies are cleared for Divisions. The framework over the doors in the Lobbies is already entirely open and has been so for some years past.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India if the Government intend to send a Factory Inspector to India to report on the working of the Factory Act in that country; and, if so, will he print and circulate a copy of the Instructions to be given to the Inspector?

There are Factory Inspectors already at work in India under the orders of the Government, and we are now awaiting their Reports for last year. The Secretary of State will ask the Government of India to append to their Reports copies of any General Instructions issued by them, or by Local Governments, for the guidance of Factory or Mine Inspectors. We are now sending out an Inspector to inquire into the working of the mines.

Will a copy of the Instructions be printed and laid before the House?

Yes, Sir.

Will the special attention of the Inspector be called to the continued employment of women in underground mines?

Yes, Sir. That is one of the chief objects in sending out the Inspector. He is specially directed to inquire into that.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will explain on what grounds the chief clerk in the Paymaster General's Office, who was retired on 1st January 1892, under the provisions of Clause 10 of the Order in Council of 15th August, 1890, as being over 70 years of age, was nevertheless employed and paid the difference between full pay and pension up to 30th June, 1892; and who is responsible for this contravention of the Order in Council?

The late chief clerk in the Paymaster General's Office was, after the award of his pension, employed in a temporary capacity for the convenience of the Public Service pending final arrangements for the superintendence of the Department. The temporary service did not count for pension, and there was no contravention of the Order in Council.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if, with a view of facilitating the passing of the Mines (Eight Hours) Bill into law this Session, it having passed its Second Reading on 3rd May by a large majority, he will give to the promoters of the Bill reasonable opportunities for relegating the Bill to the Grand Committee on Law?

At the same time I will ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there is any precedent for referring to the Grand Committee on Law a private Member's Bill of so highly controversial and exceptional a character as the Mines (Eight Hours) Bill?

There are many reasons why it would be desirable, if we could, to find further opportunities for the discussion upon this Bill; but with respect to the particular mode of procedure suggested—though I can quite understand the reasons for the suggestion—there are, I am afraid, great objections. I doubt very much whether the Bill could be referred to a Grand Committee without much debate; and I doubt whether, when it came out of Grand Committee, there would not be a disposition to discuss over again the matter there decided. This is a solid ground of objection, because I think it must be admitted that when there is so considerable a minority opposed to a Bill—and opposed to it, not upon casual and secondary grounds, but upon matters of principle and substance in the Bill—it would hardly be in accordance with the understanding on which Grand Committees were established that we should refer such Bills to a Grand Committee.

May I inquire whether the Government intend to propose any Amendments; and, if so, when they will be placed upon the Paper?

The Government has not taken part as a Government in the question, and until there is some opportunity of further progress with the Bill, I do not think it is very likely the Government will put down any Amendments.

Will the Government give an opportunity for the Bill?

I am not in a position to give any promise on that subject.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consider the expediency of proceeding with the Scotch Registration Bill, independently of the English Bill, the former being less contentious in its character than the latter?

On a point of Order, I beg to ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether the concluding part of the question does not include controversial matter?

It would be well if the words ''the former being less contentious in its character than the latter" were omitted.

My hon. Friend is aware that our desire is that this Bill should be further considered and passed; but my opinion is that our best course is to keep it as nearly pari passu with the English Bill as we can, and in company, with the English Bill. I do not think there would be any advantage in discussing the main provisions of the Scotch Bill before they have been discussed in the English Bill; but if we can discuss them in the English Bill, then the difficulty with regard to the Scotch Bill will disappear.

I beg to ask the Home Secretary, with reference to the Motion standing in his name—for leave to introduce a Bill to amend the Vaccination Act of 1867—which he proposes to take under the special Standing Order at the commence- ment of Business, if the Bill is based upon the recommendation of the Royal Commission, and if it proposes to abolish compulsory vaccination? If it does, does he not think it of too controversial a character to be brought in with these exceptional facilities?

If it were a Bill to abolish compulsory vaccination I should entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman; but it is nothing of the kind. A Commission has been sitting for some years, and the main subject of the Commission—namely, the expediency of compulsory vaccination—is a subject on which they have not yet reported; but they have presented an interim Report, signed by every Member of the Commission, in which they suggest that two changes in the law should be made at once. In the first place they report—

"We think that the imposition of repeated penalties in respect of the non-vaccination of the same child should no longer be possible.…We have arrived at this conclusion quite independently of the question whether vaccination should continue to be compulsorily enforced."

"Many of those whose imprisonment arises from their contravention of the laws relating to vaccination regard the practice as likely to be injurious to the health of their children, and are well-conducted and in other respects law-abiding citizens."

I beg to ask the Home Secretary whether he can give any information as to the reported great fire at Hull last night; whether there is any evidence that the fire was intentionally caused; and whether any person has been brought to justice for the repeated fires which have recently occurred in the town?

I have not received official confirmation of the report, and I will, therefore, ask the hon. and learned Gentleman to give notice of the question.

May I ask the President of the Board of Trade when he intends to move the appointment of the Select Committee on Railway Rates and Charges?

I hope to move it on Monday night.

I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government have decided what Business they will take first after the Whitsuntide Holidays? Will they take the Home Rule Bill on Monday?

No; we shall take Votes in Supply.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is the intention of the Government to appoint a Professor in the training college instead of Professor Joyce lately resigned; and whether he is aware that in consequence of delay the teachers are deprived of their usual lectures in method and organisation?

It is intended to appoint a successor in the Marlborough Street Training College to succeed Mr. Joyce. Arrangements for instruction in matters of school organisation have been made pending the appointment, and the students are, therefore, not deprived of any instruction they otherwise would have had.

At what date may the appointment be expected?

I am afraid I cannot answer that, but I will inquire.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Boards of Richmond District Lunatic Asylum, Dublin, and of the Cork District Lunatic Asylum, have passed resolutions condemning the new Rule of the Lunacy Board of Dublin Castle, which provides for the abolition of the office of visiting physician or surgeon to district lunatic asylums in Ireland; whether any remonstrances against this Rule have been made to him by the general public or the medical profession on the grounds that it cuts off the inmates from all independent connection with the outside world; and whether he will have said Rule re-considered with a view to its abolition?

I find that the new Rule referred to was issued in December, 1891, after careful consideration, by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Manchester (Mr. Balfour), and as a result of a specific recommendation of the Committee of which Sir Arthur Mitchell, of the Scotch Lunacy Department, was Chairman, appointed to inquire into the administration of the Lunacy Laws in Ireland. It is true that a few Asylum Boards (the Cork Board, but not the Richmond Board being among the number) passed resolutions in favour of the retention of the office of consulting or visiting physician; but the great majority of the Boards either expressed warm approval of the new Rule or accepted it without comment. I might also mention that some of the principal medical authorities on mental diseases and lunacy administration, at their meeting in London in May, 1892, expressed the opinion that the change would be found to act with decided advantage to the lunacy work generally in Ireland, as has been the case in other countries where the corresponding office has been abolished. I do not consider that any sufficient grounds have yet been shown for a reversion of the old system in this respect.

Was this resolution passed in consequence of the subsequent remodelling of the Board and of its being packed by Nationalists?

Not at all.