I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that at the 10 o'clock parade held nightly at Pontefract Depot all sergeants who are in barracks are forced to attend such parades, although sergeants availing themselves of their privilege to be absent from barracks are exempted; whether there is any Regulation requiring such attendance; and whether such attendance is required in any other depot besides Pontefract?

I am informed that the sergeants who happen to be in Pontefract barracks are required to attend the tattoo parade. It is entirely within the discretion of the officer commanding to require this attendance of sergeants if he thinks there is cause for it. I have no knowledge as to the practice in this respect at other regimental depots.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether his Department has issued a Circular, inviting subscriptions to an Official Code Vocabulary for telegrams, which is to be issued by the International Telegraph Office at Berne, at 10s. per copy; whether the use of this Code is to be made compulsory for Code messages, and whether this Rule will deprive merchants and others of the power of sending a secret Code message; how many copies will be purchased by the British Post Office, and at what cost; and whether it can be arranged that the use of the new Code shall be at the discretion of persons wishing to dispatch messages?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The number of copies of the Vocabulary to be purchased by the British Post Office, the price to be paid for them, and the charge to the public will depend on the demand. The Official Vocabulary is intended to facilitate the transmission of secret Code messages; and its use will become compulsory for European Code messages three years after its publication.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he can explain why it was that, in the year ending 31st March, 1892, out of a Vote of £47,000, for Scotch piers, harbours, &c, only £20,355 4s. 10d. was expended; why, in the year ending 31st March, 1893, out of a Vote of £20,000, for the same purpose, only £4,131 19s. was expended; why, under these circumstances, in the Estimates for the year ending 31st March, 1894, the Estimate for this purpose was so much as £16,000; and whether during the year this sum, or, if not, what portion of it, is likely to be expended?

The comparison suggested by the hon. Member is not quite accurate. The Vote of £47,000, taken for the year ending 31st March, 1892, embraced all the Highland and Island works, including subsidies for steamers, whereas the Votes of £20,000 and £ 16,000 subsequently referred to only relate to the special subhead devoted to piers, harbours, &c. The main reason for the comparatively small expenditure in the first two years as compared with the Estimate taken, was the difficulty of carrying out the manifold stages of the procedure imposed by the Highland and Islands Public Works Act, 1891, and in concluding contracts for the construction of the harbour works. I may add that various harbour works have during the past year been sanctioned by the Treasury, which are in the final stage, and contracts have been entered into for their construction by the County Councils; and that I therefore anticipate that the £16,000 will be almost if not entirely exhausted by the end of the current financial year.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that the licensed victuallers and others at Pontefract, on whom the 3rd King's Dragoon Guards were billeted for some six to eight weeks during the labour dispute in the coal trade in the months of September and October, 1893, have as yet received no compensation in respect to the charges and expenses imposed upon and incurred by them; and whether he will direct that payment shall be made forthwith, and that it shall be at the same rate per man and horse as was made to those on whom cavalry soldiers were billeted during the same period at Wakefield and other Yorkshire towns?

The persons on whom troops were billeted at Pontefract can be paid at once up to the limit laid down in the Army Annual Act; but they claim higher payment, and correspondence is taking place with the Treasury on the question whether any additional payment can be made from public funds.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if his attention has been called to a Vestry meeting, held 22nd of February, at St. Stephens-by-Launceston, for the purpose of electing a representative Governor on the trust of a charity known as Horwell's Endowed Schools, when the Vicar is stated to have put the nomination of a Mr. Thompson to the mooting, and to have declared him duly elected, although only five hands were held up in favour, while 10 hands were held up against his being elected, and that the Vicar refused to receive the nomination of another gentleman, and abruptly closed the meeting at the end of a few minutes; and whether such trustee has been elected according to law; and, if not, will he take the necessary steps to have such election declared invalid, and cause another meeting to be held to elect afresh? I will also ask the right hon. Gentleman if his attention has been called to the report in The Western Daily Mercury of a Vestry meeting held 22nd of February at St. Stephen's, Launceston, for the purpose of electing a Governor on the trust of Horwell's Endowed School, wherein the Vicar is said to have put the nomination of a Mr. Thompson without any reasonable interval, and refused to put the nomination of another gentleman, declaring Mr. Thompson elected, although only five hands were held up for him and 10 against; the reverend gentleman is said to have also abruptly closed the meeting without giving those present an opportunity of signing the same, and did not even make an entry, the whole meeting only lasting four minutes; if, on ascertaining the above account to be substantially correct, he will take steps to cancel the said election of a Governor, in order to have one elected in accordance with the wishes of the inhabitants; and will he propose to take steps in the matter?

My attention had not been called to the matter referred to prior to my hon. Friend giving notice of the question. The Local Government Board have communicated with the Vicar of the parish, and he states that Dr. Thompson having been proposed for the office the proposal was seconded and carried, five voting for the motion; and that it is not the ease that 10 voted against it. He adds that it was not until after Dr. Thompson had been elected, and the business of the meeting was at an end, that anything was said as to a wish that some other person should be proposed. Whatever may be the facts, the matter is not one in which the Local Government Board have any jurisdiction. They would not be empowered under any circumstances to declare the election invalid, or to cause another meeting to be held for a further election. As to my hon. Friend's second question on the same subject, I can only state that the Local Government Board are not empowered to take any steps to cancel the election referred to.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Estimate in Vote 8, Class III., shipbuilding contract work, exceeded the amount actually expended by £235,106 during the year 1892–93 and by £186,617 during the year 1891⤓92, and that, during the six years ending 1893, this Estimate has invariably exceeded the amount actually expended, as is likewise the case with Vote 10 for Works, Buildings, and Repairs; whether the large surpluses thus arising through continuous overestimates are applied to meet deficiencies on other Votes beyond the sums voted by Parliament for those Votes, are occasionally used to ease the Votes of a succeeding year, or are applied to meet expenditure not provided for by Parliament: whether the Admiralty have yet made any reply to the representatives of the Comptroller and Auditor General, that the Admiralty practice, as shown in these Estimates, tends to weaken the control of Parliament over the Appropriation of Grants; and whether steps will be taken to secure that in future the Estimate and the expenditure shall be more evenly balanced?

The hon. Member's question relates to points raised in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Report on the Navy Appropriation Account. These points are under consideration at the Admiralty, and a reply to the Audit Office letter will shortly be sent. The whole subject will then come in the usual way before the Committee on Public Accounts, who will, if necessary, take evidence upon it and report their conclusions to the House.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the complaints made by the Comptroller and Auditor General and by the Treasury of the inadequacy and the want of explicit-ness and clearness of the explanations offered by the War Office to account for the great differences between the sums estimated for and the sums actually expended during the year 1892–3; whether he can afford any further explanation of the fact that in this year on the Vote of Guns and Carriages, Repairs, and Conversions, whereas the sum of £41,300 was voted no less than £62,248 11s. 9d. was actually spent, and that under the head of Appropriations in Aid the sales of old stores, estimated to produce £105,000,only produced £55,136 11s.7d., in both which cases the inadequacy of the explanation has been specially noted by the Treasury; and whether, in future, steps will be taken to secure that the estimate and the expenditure shall be more evenly balanced?

I am aware of the references made by the Comptroller and Auditor General to these two cases. As attention has thus been specially called to them, they will necessarily be examined and considered by the Accounts Committee, and the War Department will be prepared to give to that Committee all the explanations required. That is the regular process, which it is not desirable to anticipate.

I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in the meantime, any steps will be taken to meet the suggestions and requirements of the Auditor and Comptroller General?

No doubt we will meet the views of the Comptroller and Auditor General as far as possible.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can explain how it is that the claim of £7,815 2s. 2d. for storing life-saving apparatus at coastguard stations, made by the Admiralty against the Board of Trade in 1891 and submitted to the Treasury, has not yet been settled?

The Mercantile Marine Fund, which is administered by the Board of Trade, has claims against the Admiralty and other Departments for services rendered to them. The Admiralty and other Departments have claims against the Mercantile Marine Fund, of which that of £7,815 2s. 2d. for storing life-saving apparatus is one. These claims may probably, so far as they will go, be set against one another. But no precise adjustment can be made until the time comes for a revision of the conditions on which the Grant in Aid of the Mercantile Marine Fund is based. These conditions are under discussion between the Board of Trade and the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a remonstrance has been received from the Dominion Government of Canada against the continuance of the Order for slaughtering Canadian cattle on landing in the United Kingdom; whether the Minister of Agriculture in Canada has furnished all possible evidence of the non-existence of contagious pleuro-pneumonia in the Dominion; whether the Secretary of State for the Colonies has made any representation to the President of the Board of Agriculture respecting the strong feeling existing in the Colony against scheduling Canadian cattle; and whether the Papers on the subject will be laid upon the Table of the House?

A very full and voluminous Report has been received, and is now under consideration. The question as to giving Papers should be addressed to the Board of Agriculture.

In the absence of my hon. Colleague (Mr. Picton), I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education on what date Her Majesty's Inspector first reported adversely on the structural condition of the British School, Matlock, and how often the attention of the managers has been called to the matter; whether the managers have yet taken any steps to remedy the defects complained of; whether it is a fact that this school has no playground, and that the sanitary arrangements are defective; whether complaints about the state of the school have been sent to him by parents of the children attending it; and whether, seeing that the annual inspection is just over, he will now peremptorily decline further recognition to the school?

Her Majesty's Inspector reported adversely on this school after the inspection in February, 1892, and the attention of the managers was called to his Report in March. Plans for alterations were submitted by the managers in May and a lengthy correspondence followed. During the summer of 1892 the managers were in negotiation for additional site, and they submitted fresh plans in September which, after further protracted correspondence, were finally approved in February, 1893. Her Majesty's Inspector reported to the Department in August last that nothing had been done towards carrying out the alterations, and the managers were subsequently warned that the school in its present condition could not continue to be recognised indefinitely. The school has no playground, and is in parts damp and insufficiently lighted and ventilated. Complaints have been received from a parent of children attending it that it is cold and draughty. The last Annual Report has just been received, and is now under consideration. It appears from it that no alterations have yet been made.

On behalf of my hon. Colleague, I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has been called to the report in The. Birkenhead News of 3rd March of a statement made by the Rev. 0. T. L. Crossley at a public meeting held as Liscard, Cheshire, on the 2nd March, from which it appears that Mr. Crossley offered a site for a school in the churchyard at Liscard, which site was approved by the Department; whether Mr. Crossley's statement as to the approval of the site is correct; and, if so, whether the site in question satisfied the Rules of the Department as to playground, &c.; and whether the Department have power to sanction the alienation of land dedicated to another public purpose?

I have not seen the report to which the hon. Member refers. Mr. Crossley, last year, submitted a site for a new school at Liscard behind his church. His proposal was sanctioned by the Chancellor of the Diocese. No interments had ever taken place in the portion of the site proposed for the school, and none in any part of the churchyard for several years. The architect of the Department reported that the site was sufficient for a school of about 400 children, and Her Majesty's Inspector did not see any objection to it. Mr. Crossley was therefore informed that the site could be accepted. The question as to alienation does not concern the Department.

I bog to ask the Postmaster General whether the revision in the Limerick postal and telegraph staff's which has been pending for the past two years has yet been sanctioned; if the Returns of Duties and the Revised Scheme for the working of the Limerick Post Office were submitted in October last: and if he will state what is the cause of the delay, and when the revision is likely to be settled?

The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that any revision of these staffs has been pending for the last two years. A revision of the postal side of the Office—involving a few minor alterations—has, however, recently been under consideration, and is now before the Treasury, and it is hoped that it will shortly be carried out. Inquiries which have recently been made respecting the telegraph work appear to indicate that there is waste of force in certain duties; and I am having this question carefully investigated.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he will during the present Session give a Return of all Public Elementary Schools similar to the Return given in August, 1890, with such alterations as may be necessary in consequence of the fee grant?

A Return including this information is in course of preparation for the year ended 31st August, 1893. As it is of a somewhat elaborate character, it will probably not be ready for issue till the Session is well advanced.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if his attention has been called to the extreme diversity of opinion amongst fishermen in and about Loch Fyne upon the subject of the close time for herrings; whether he is aware that the close time which is suitable for one locality is not suitable for others; and whether he will instruct the Fishery Board to take evidence on the spot with the view of making some alteration in the present Rules?

I am fully aware that there is a considerable difference of opinion as to a close-time for herring-fishing on the West Coast. In respect to Loch Fyne, I am informed by the Fishery Board that the voluntary close-time extends from l5th March till 1st June, and was established in 1888 by the Argyll and Bute Fishermen's Association. This close-time was, up to this year, strongly supported by all sections of this Association. Quite recently the southern section of the Association petitioned against it, and the Board have informed the various sections that they desire to leave the question of close-time in the hands of the fishermen themselves. I may add that an inquiry was made by the Fishery Board in 1892, which disclosed a very considerable divergence of opinion amongst the fishermen, fish- curers, and others interested in regard to the question of establishing a close-time for herrings. In all the circumstances, I do not propose to institute any further inquiry at present.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the medical officer of Dundalk Gaol, in his quarterly Report in January, 1894, drew attention to the case of a prisoner in said gaol named Sheridan, and suggested that the Prisons Board (Ireland) should issue a Rule that prisoners under medical treatment should not be put to hard labour till taken off the sick list by the medical officer of the prison in which they are confined; and whether the Prisons Board refused to issue such a Rule; and, if so, whether he will direct the Prisons Board to alter their decision, and issue a Rule to prevent the recurrence of the grievance complained of? I will further ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can state how many inquiries on oath and how many inquiries not on oath took place in Dundalk Gaol, or in reference thereto, from 1st January, 1886, to the date of the appointment of the present Governor; how many similar inquiries have taken place from the date of the appointment of the present Governor of said gaol to 1st January, 1894; and how many warders are still attached to Dundalk Gaol who were there at the time of the appointment of the present Governor? And, in addition, I will ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that a prisoner named Sheridan, confined in Dundalk Gaol, being reported seriously ill on the night of 8th December, 1893, was visited in his cell at 10.30 p.m. that night by Dr. Flood, who was doing duty for the medical officer of the gaol owing to the illness of the latter; that Dr. Flood made a note in the medical officer's journal that Sheridan was suffering from a bronchial attack and had a temperature as high as 103·2 degrees, and ordered him medicine and nourishment and to be poulticed, &c.; that, on visiting Sheridan at 8·30 a.m. on 9th December, he found him out of bed and picking oakum, his tasked labour, with a poultice on his back; whether Sheridan subsequently developed acute pneumonia, which nearly carried him off; whether he can state by whoso direction a prisoner under medical treatment, and as ill as above indicated, was ordered out of bed and sent to his ordinary hard labour under the conditions described; whether any Rule exists in Irish prisons forbidding prisoners under medical treatment being put to hard or any labour till certified as fit by the medical officer; and whether, if there be no such Rule, he will issue such explicit instructions as will in future effectually prevent the recurrence of such inhumanity as was practised in Sheridan's case?

As regards these questions, I have to say that I have received from the General Prisons Board a Report dealing with the action of the prison officials in the case. Rut with a view to elicit the entire facts, I propose to direct a sworn inquiry to be made into the matter by the Prisons Board.

I beg to thank the right hon. Gentleman for his answer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that a number of tenants of Mr. Carbery's and Lady Saurin, in the County Kilkenny, signed agreements for the purchase of their holdings about four years ago; and whether he can state the reason why the purchase money has not yet been advanced by the Land Commission?

I am informed by the Land Commissioners that on the 8th October, 1891, 27 agreements were lodged on behalf of tenants on this estate for advances under the provisions of the Land Purchase Acts of 188.5 and 1888. Applications had at that time, however, been received largely in excess of the grant of £10,000,000 available under the Acts mentioned, and at the present date funds have not yet been released for the particular applications referred to, and consequently they cannot, so I am informed, yet be finally ruled on. It is possible, however, that funds may soon be available.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with respect to the Commission to inquire into Explosions in Coal Mines from Coaldust, which has been sitting for some time, what is the present position of the inquiry; and whether the House will soon be in possession of the Report of the Commission?

At the conclusion of the evidence the Commission adjourned, in order to await the result of certain experiments. These experiments are now finished, and I am informed by the Chairman that they will now proceed to the immediate consideration of the Report, which he hopes will be presented not later than the end of June next.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether there is any intention of at once increasing the power of the light on The Smalls, as has been so often urged by Masters of the Mercantile Marine?

I am informed by the Trinity House that 18 months ago the power of the light at The Smalls was increased more than 20 per cent., and that there is no necessity for making a further increase.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty have yet accepted responsibility in respect of the test and proof of guns and the inspection of warlike stores for the Naval Service, or whether this question, as to which the Committee on Public Accounts last year reported that it had made no advance since 1892, still remains unsettled?

The question has been referred for consideration to the Naval Warlike Stores Committee, who have not yet reported upon it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the newly appointed Consul of the United States for Madagascar has abstained from applying for the exequatur through the medium of the French Resident General, and has referred back to his Government for further instructions; and whether it would be possible for Her Majesty's Government to cause inquiry to be made on the spot into the existing position of affairs in Madagascar, and to place themselves in communication with the Government of the United States with a view to joint action in respect to Madagascar, in which the two Powers have equal commercial and other interests?

It is understood that the United States Consul has not yet applied for an exequatur, but Her Majesty's Government have no knowledge of his communications with his Government. The existing position of affairs is so well known that a local inquiry is superfluous. In view of the position of France as the protecting Power, Her Majesty's Government cannot adopt the suggestion in the second paragraph of the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state what is the reason for the delay in the issue of the decoration to Volunteer non-commissioned officers; and whether he can give any definite information as to the date when the same will be ready for distribution?

Much consideration has been given to the question of the conditions and character of this decoration, and I hope to state to-morrow the conclusions at which I have arrived.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in offering for sale the site of the closed Kirkdale Gaol, the Government reserve any portion of the site as an open air space, or make any conditions as to the purposes to which the site is to be put; and whether the Government have definitely abandoned all idea of building military barracks on the site?

No portion of the site is reserved for any purpose, and there are no conditions as to the purposes to which the site is to be put, and I am informed by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War that he is not aware of any intention of erecting barracks on the site.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is proposed to carry out the contemplated overhaul of the hull and machinery of H.M.S. Warspite, at Haulbowline Dockyard?

Any necessary work that can be conveniently and economically carried out at Haulbowline will be taken in hand there.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether any, and what, action has been taken, on the recommendations of the Indian Public Service Commission of 1386, regarding the special departments of the Indian Administration, referred to by Lord Cross in the last paragraph (37) of his Despatch (No. Public 104), dated London, 12th September, 1889; whether the Local Governments and the Government of India have forwarded to the Secretary of State their views on the suggestions of the Commission regarding these special departments as desired by Lord Cross in the above paragraph of his Despatch; and what orders have been passed by the Secretary of State thereon?

It is impossible to give, within the limit of an answer, in this House a statement of the steps which have been taken with regard to the matters referred to in the hon. Member's question. The subject is a large and complicated one, and has been dealt with in a lengthy Correspondence which is not yet complete. When the Correspondence is complete there will be no objection to laying it on the Table of the House if the hon. Member will move for it.

On behalf of the hon. Member for West Cavan, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Bechuanaland Concessions Commission sat at Gaberones on 10th May, 1893, and heard evidence, the hearings occupying about a week; whether the Commission have given their decision on any of the cases then heard; if not, what is the reason for the delay; and whether he can say when the Report or decision of the Commission may be expected?

The final Report and connected documents of the Bechuanaland Concessions Commission were received at the Colonial Office in December last. They form a very bulky document, which requires very careful consideration. The pressure of work in the South African Department has been so great that it has been, as yet, quite impossible to deal with the Report.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that six steam trawlers were seen at work about eight miles N. N. E. from Port Knockie on Sunday the 4th of March; whether he will state what arrangements are made to prevent and punish such offences against the bye-laws excluding trawlers from the Moray Firth; and whether anchorage is obtainable at Craigenroan for a gunboat when employed for the protection of the fisheries in this locality?

On inquiry I am informed by the Fishery Board that on the 9th instant they received a communication from the Moray Firth Fisheries Association which they at once sent to the Commander of H.M.S. Jackal, who reported to the effect that inquiries had been made regarding the alleged trawling, but that there were apparently no grounds for the complaints, the vessels probably being steam liners and vessels on passage. The Moray Firth is patrolled by the Jackal, which I is specially set apart for the superintendence of the fisheries in that area and its protection against the operation of trawlers. In addition to this, if the letters and numbers of any trawler detected working in the proscribed waters are intimated to the Board, the case is reported to the Procurator Fiscal. There is anchorage off Kingston, three miles west of Craigeuroan, but it is open and unsafe, with wind from east to north to north-west. That is the opinion of the Fishery Board, and it is corroborated by the Admiralty.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the results of recent trials of armour plates by the United States Government at Annapolis and at India Head prove the great superiority in resistance of plates constructed of nickel steel as compared with compound plates and plates constructed by the Harvey process without nickel; whether he is aware that the German Government have adopted nickel steel plates for vessels now in course of building; whether Her Majesty's Government have nevertheless adopted the cheaper Harveyed plates for protected vessels now being constructed for Her Majesty's Navy; whether any trials of nickel plates as against Harveyed and other plates have recently been made in this country; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government will lay upon the Table a Report showing the nature and result of such trials; and whether Her Majesty's Government have received any authentic account of the recent trials of various kinds of plates in the United States which they can make public?

The hon. Gentleman will find the general answer to his questions in the Explanatory Statement of the First Lord of the Admiralty, which will, I trust, be in the hands of Members to-morrow. The Admiralty note the results of armour plate trials made abroad, but rely mainly on the results of our own trials of armour manufactured under our own officers' inspection. Doubtless the German Government pursues a corresponding policy. Cheapness has not been the reason for the conclusions at which we have arrived as the result of a long series of trials. It would not be possible to publish either official Reports of our trials, or special information as to trials abroad.

I beg to give notice that I shall call attention to this matter on the Estimates.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the inhabitants of the Arran Islands are in a famine-stricken condition, owing to the failure of their crops last season, and the tempestuous winter weather, which prevented them from pursuing their fishing avocations; whether they are destitute of the moans of tilling their lands; and what steps, if any, are being taken to save them from death by starvation, and to supply them with seed potatoes for their holdings?

Representations have been made to me regarding the condition of the people on these islands, and on their receipt I at once directed inquiry to be made, and special attention has since been given to the matter. The Local Government Board Inspector, who has recently spent several days on the island, has made careful inquiry into the condition of the people, and as to the sufficiency of existing relief arrangements; and the relieving officer, who is resident on the principal island, has at his disposal the means of affording outdoor relief in cases of necessity, and has been fully instructed by the Board's Inspector as to his duties and responsibilities. The prolonged gales have, no doubt, seriously inconvenienced, and to some extent impoverished, the islanders; but it is not correct to say that they are starving, or that any general destitution exists; and, as I have pointed out, the Local Government Board have adopted all necessary precautions for dealing with any unexpected emergency. Application has been made by the parish priest for a quantity of seed potatoes to be supplied to the islanders as a free gift; but with this application it is not, I regret, possible to comply, as there are no funds available for the purpose, and the Congested Districts Board are only empowered to provide seed for cash payment.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that a serious assault and breach of discipline were committed by Lieutenant Colonel Coffin, at the Royal Marine Barracks, Stonehouse, on the 28th ultimo, under the following circumstances—namely, that this officer whilst inspecting men under orders to embark, and having occasion to find? fault with one of them, called the Company Sergeant, Colour Sergeant Baker, before him and ordered him to remove the man from the ranks, saying to the Sergeant "Get out of my way," "Get out of my way," "Get away, d—n you," at the same time stepping forward and pushing the Colour Sergeant with such violence as to cause him to stagger several paces backwards, and his cap to fall from his head; whether he is aware that the incident was witnessed by the following officers—namely, Captain Gordon, Lieutenants Graham, Pearse, and Barker, and by upwards of 100 noncommissioned officers and men, and some civilians; whether he is aware that Colour Sergeant Baker has been upwards of 15 years a non-commissioned officer, and during that time has borne an unimpeachable character, and is now within two months of completing his 21 years' service; and what steps the Admiralty purpose taking to protect him and others from such conduct?

said: I should like to know whether this question, which contains a serious imputation upon an officer, is to be allowed to pass over without notice being given as to when it will be answered? Such questions as these ought to be answered directly they appear on the Paper.

It is usual to allow questions to be postponed if the Minister wishes it.

As reference has been made to me, I should explain in justice to myself that I understand communications are passing between the Admiralty and the Marine Authorities which will, I hope, put this matter in a position satisfactory to those who are aggrieved.

I rise to Order. I do not think any statement of that sort should be made.

When is the question to be answered?

I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether it is the intention of the Admiralty to introduce a working week of 48 hours into the Naval Establishments at the commencement of the new financial year?

Will the hon. Gentleman also answer my question to the same effect?

I shall be much obliged if my hon. Friend and also the right hon. Member for Cambridge University will postpone their questions.

How long is this question to be postponed? I have been putting it ever since March last. I should like to have some definite idea when it will be replied to.

I am unable to name any definite time. The right hon. Gentleman must use his discretion as to when he will repeat the question.

It will be my duty on the Estimates to call the attention of the House to the dilatory proceedings of the Government on this matter.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Tyrone, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, as President of the Local Government Board in Ireland, his attention has been called to the Report of Mr. Ellis, the Auditor of the Board, in regard to the accounts of the Fermoy Union, in which it is stated that he could not speak too strongly of the abuses that exist in connection with outdoor relief; that in LS81–2 the expenditure under this head was £311, whilst in the year 1892–3 it was £1,646, or about one-sixth of the entire resources of the Union; and that neither the Guardians nor the relieving officers fairly understood the legal restrictions on the administration of this form of relief, and in many cases were deliberately careless; whether the action of the Guardians in the Fermoy Union is typical of what prevails over much of the South and West of Ireland; whether, owing to this and other forms of maladministration, many of the Poor Law Unions throughout Ireland are in a state of financial embarrassment; and if he proposes to take any steps to secure the due administration of the Poor Law?

Before that question is answered I wish to know, Sir—I am not aware if questions are submitted to you in the absence of Mr. Speaker—whether it is in Order in a question of this nature to introduce such statements as are contained in the second and third paragraphs, and is it not usual for the Clerks at the Table to insist on the questions being confined to matters of fact?

These paragraphs appear by inadvertence, and I directed them to be struck out when my attention was called to them. I may add that during the last few days there has been very great pressure on the Clerks.

In his recent Report on the audit of the Fermoy Union accounts the Auditor did, I am told, refer to the administration of outdoor relief in the Union in the terms quoted in the question. The action of the Fermoy Guardians is not, as asserted by the hon. Gentleman, "typical of what prevails" over much of the South and West of Ireland. The Local Government Board are aware of a few Unions which are at present more or less financially embarrassed; but this arises not so much from extravagance in the giving of outdoor relief as from the action of the Guardians in failing to strike adequate rates and to punctually collect the same when struck. The Fermoy Guardians have instructed their relieving officers to prepare; and lay before them at their next meeting a Return of all cases of outdoor relief, with full particulars and observations in respect of each case, with a view to a thorough revision taking place.

Is it not the fact that the accounts for all Irish Poor Law Unions are subjected to minute scrutiny at the hands of the Government Auditors every year, and have any Reports been made by these officials that such abuses as are indicated in the question exist, or that the Guardians are ignorant of their duties?

What my hon. Friend implies in his question is quite true. The accounts are annually audited by an Auditor appointed by the Local Government Board; and as to the implication in the last paragraph of the question of the hon. Member for South Tyrone, I am able to say that the statement that the Poor Law is not fairly and duly administered is entirely inconsistent with the facts.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any reason to believe that all the Poor Law Unions in England are free from financial embarrassment?

I cannot answer that.

How many other Poor Law Unions in Ireland are in this state?

I cannot say how many, but my Report is that it is very few.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Tyrone, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of cases of crime reported by the police to the Judge of Assize in County Clare at the recent Spring Assizes, held at Ennis, the number of persons made amenable thereat, and the result of the trials of the said persons; and the number of Clare prisoners tried at the Winter Assizes, held at Cork, and the results of the trials of the said persons under the change of venue involved in the Winter Assize Act?

The total number of cases reported by the police to the Judge at the last Spring Assizes for Clare was 118, which included all cases that occurred in the county since the Summer Assizes of 1893. The number of bills found by the Grand Jury was seven, resulting in three pleas of guilty, one conviction, and three disagreements of juries. The number of persons returned for trial from Clare to the Winter Assizes, held at Cork, was 30, resulting in seven convictions, eight pleas of guilty, five acquittals, and seven disagreements of juries. In the remaining three cases a nolle prosequi was entered in one, and in two the defendants were discharged on their own recognizances to come up for trial when called upon. I may observe that Mr. Justice O'Brien, in his remarks at the Clare Spring Assizes regarding the number of cases in which persons were made amenable, fell into the blunder of ignoring the Winter Assizes. The list of cases furnished to the Judge covered the period from the Summer Assizes, 1893, to Spring Assizes, 1894—in all 118 cases. Seven persons had been returned for trial to the Spring Assizes, with the results already stated by me; but there were 11 other Clare cases for trial at the Cork Winter Assizes, in which there were seven convictions, so that, instead of there being only four cases in which persons were made amenable—that is to say, one conviction and three pleas of guilty—there were in the period referred to by the Judge 15 cases in all sent for trial and eight convictions.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me how it is that Mr. Justice O'Brien always goes the Minister Assizes; also has his attention been called to the fact that this Judge's observations at the Spring Assizes in County Clare were exactly the same as in the Charge which he made at Cork Assizes in 1886, when a Home Rule Government was in power, including the statement that "the waters had not yet subsided," and other literary gems of that description? Further, has his attention been called to the strong censure passed by Justice Gibson on his learned brother with regard to his sentences?

I am unable to say how it happens that Mr. Justice O'Brien always goes the Munster Circuit, the arrangements made being irrespective of any action of the Executive Government. I confess I read this learned Judge's Charge with some amazement, because the impression which the Judge, travelling, I think, entirely out of his province, attempts to convey on the relative state of order in Clare is entirely unsupported by the opinion of the Local Police Authorities, and I prefer to believe the Local Police Authorities.

In how many of the 118 cases reported in County Clare were convictions obtained from Clare juries?

I do not carry all the figures in my head.

Was there one case?

As it is suggested from the Bench and otherwise that the state of things could be improved by resort to the machinery of coercion, I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not the fact that, not only in Clare but throughout Ireland during the period of the Crimes Act of 1887, the proportion of persons made amenable to the total number of crimes committed was always extremely minute?

Yes, speaking more particularly in regard to Clare, and unless my recollection deceives me—and I do not think it does—the same applies to Ireland generally, the proportion of persons made amenable for crimes committed in Clare during the operation of the Criminal Law and Procedure (Amendment) Act was not largely in excess of those which they now succeed in obtaining.

Do not the statistics of crime in Clare compare favourably with those when the Coercion Act was in operation?

Were not the observations of Mr. Justice O'Brien based on the Returns of the police furnished at the Assizes?

I cannot undertake to say what was the precise foundation on which the learned Judge based his observations.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the drivers and horses allotted to the transport of the Army Hospital Corps are supplied by the Army Service Corps; whether the men and horses of the Army Service Corps, belonging as they do to the combatant brunch, will be under the protection of the Geneva Convention in time of war; or whether they will be liable to be shot or captured while in charge of, or attached to, the ambulance waggons; and whether the practice of supplying the ambulance transport from a combatant corps prevails in any Army other than our own?

The transport needed for medical services in time of war would be supplied from the mounted companies of the Army Service Corps. Men so employed, when wearing the brassard, would be under the protection of the Geneva Convention. I am informed that in Austria, France, Germany, and Russia ambulance transport is provided from combatant corps.

was understood to ask, further, whether in France, Germany, and Austria those men were not deemed to be under the protection of the Geneva Convention, and whether the same did not apply to the ambulance drivers permanently attached to the Ambulance Corps?

asked for notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether the Government will introduce legislation with regard to Scottish Fisheries during the present Session?

The Government intend to press the Local Government Bill for Scotland to completion before they undertake any fresh legislation of importance.

Would it be possible to distribute copies of the Local Government Bill before Easter, so that we may consult our constituents in relation thereto?

It has been arranged that no Government Bills shall be introduced before Easter.

Does that apply to the amendments to the Crofters Act?

I hope it will be possible at the latter part of the Session to get through the short Bill required to complete the Crofters Act.

May I ask whether, in the event of representations being made that no serious opposition will be offered to the introduction of the Scotch Local Government Bill before Easter, the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to consider the possibility of moving the Adjourn-merit one night at 10 o'clock to enable a statement to be made?

I have given a pledge that the business up to Easter shall be confined to financial matters, and I understand that there is an objection to the introduction of Government Bills before that time.

Are we to understand from the somewhat ambiguous reply of the Secretary for Scotland that, in the event of satisfactory progress being made with the Local Government Bill, the Government propose to bring in a Bill dealing with the Scotch fisheries?

I should certainly give preference to the Crofters Amendment Bill.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if the decision to exempt British cotton goods from the Import Duty imposed upon most other articles was arrived at by the Government of India, or whether the exemption was by order of the Secretary of State; and upon what principle the Government of India is prohibited from imposing a duty of 5 per cent. upon certain British goods for Revenue purposes, while the Home Government, for the same object, imposes a duty of nearly 50 per cent. upon Indian tea?

The Secretary of State declined to sanction the proposal of the Government of India to include cotton goods among those on which a duty was to be imposed. He did so on the ground that a duty on such goods in the shape in which it was proposed by the Government of India would operate as a Protective Duty, and that, in view of the Resolutions passed by the House of Commons on the subject in 1877 and 1879, such a duty ought not to be imposed unless a more urgent financial necessity were shown than that which the Government of India had laid before him. I may add that the Tea Duty is a Revenue Duty charged upon all tea consumed. With respect to articles on which, when imported from abroad, a Customs Duty is levied, a countervailing Excise Duty is levied on the same articles, if produced or manufactured in this country.

May I ask whether the cotton trade in India since the abolition of duties on imported cotton goods has not largely increased, and would not the direct effect of the re-imposition of the duties be to further stimulate the manufacturing them at the expense of the already suffering and depressed home industry?

I answered that question the other night, when I gave the figures showing the enormous progress made in the internal cotton trade of India.

Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer, seeing that the Home Government has decided to fetter the hands of the Government of India in the matter of an essential duty in order to avoid a deficit, be prepared in the Budget to provide for such deficit?

I think the hon. Member will hardly expect me to answer such a question offhand.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether in this present year Overseers will have to be nominated and surveyors to be elected at the parish meetings which ought to be held on the 2otb of March (or within 14 days thereof), or will the present officials continue to hold office until November next, in like manner as the Guardians?

Overseers and surveyors of highways are not continued in office by the Local Government Act, and it will be necessary in the present year that these officers should be appointed at the same time and in the same manner as if the Act had not passed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Irish Privy Council on the 7th instant, upholding the objection of Sir Joseph Neale M' Kenna to the erection of a labourer's cottage on his property by the Youghal (County Cork) Board of Guardians; whether he is aware that in the adjoining Union of Midleton more than one-third of the original scheme was nullified owing to similar successful action on the part of landowners, thus depriving 103 labourers of cottages in this Union alone; and whether, in view of the fact that the working of the Labourers' Cottages (Ireland) Acts is seriously crippled by the extensive use made of the power to appeal under the present system, he will take steps to enable Boards of Guardians duly to carry out the duties entrusted to them under these Acts?

The fact is as stated in the first paragraph. As regards the Midleton Union, the number of cottages included in the Guardians' scheme was 303, and the number sanctioned by the Local Government Board was 208; Petitions were lodged against 17 of these, and the Privy Council disallowed the objections as to nine cottages, with the result that 200 of the 208 cottages previously approved by the Board were finally authorised. The Board inform me that they do not think that the working of the Labourers' Act is seriously crippled by the use made of the power of appeal.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the vast majority of cases the Privy Council have paid no attention to the representations of Boards of Guardians?

I cannot say I am aware of it.

J beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has been drawn to the dissatisfaction existing among teachers in public elementary schools in England and Wales with the recent appointment of Mr. L. J. Roberts, B.A., as one of Her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools: and whether he has ascertained that there were no Sub-Inspectors already engaged in the work of the inspection of schools, or teachers employed in the work of instruction of schools, who being certificated teachers and possessed of the requisite experience might have received the appointment in question?

May I ask whether it has been the custom to nominate Inspectors from the ranks of school teachers; whether there is any objection to such nominations; and whether the last Vice President did not approve a scheme for making such nominations?

No previous Government has made any such appointment as those indicated in the question, with one exception, when a distinguished University man, who was for a short time a certificated teacher, became ultimately an Inspector. I have received several letters expressing dissatisfaction on this subject, and have seen some letters written to others. I observe that these letters have, almost without exception, ignored the fact that almost for the first time in the history of the Department, as far as I am aware, two Sub-Inspectors who had been certificated teachers have been made Inspectors since I became Vice President out of four appointments made. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative, because I do not take the view that all Inspectors without exception should necessarily have been certificated teachers. I think that complete exclusiveness in any part of our educational system at a time when by degrees the various grades of education in the country are becoming more effectively united into a common whole would be a misfortune. I am fully satisfied with the choice that has been made in the case of Mr. Roberts, who is now serving under the Chief Inspector for Wales.

I bog to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the source from which is derived the water supply for the military barracks, Mullingar; whether the supply is by contract; if so, who are the contractors; what is the rate per 1,000 gallons; and when does the contract terminate?

The water supply for the barracks at Mullingar comes from the Convent of the Annunciation, Mullingar, under a contract with the Bishop of the diocese and others. It is not usual to disclose contract prices in such cases. The fixed term of the contract expires in the present month; but the arrangement continues until six months' notice on either side is given.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the existence of this contract prevents the town of Mullingar accepting an adequate water supply, which has been offered at the rate of 4d. per 1,000 gallons?

I have no knowledge of that. If the hon. Member will inform me of the circumstances I will inquire into the matter.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information as to progress of the civil war in Brazil, and especially as to the reported surrender of Admiral da Gama?

The Senior Naval Officer at Rio, telegraphing on the 14th instant, states that the Portuguese commanding naval officer has received Admiral Saldhana da Gama and many of his officers and men on board his vessel. Her Majesty's Government have not yet received any further details relating to the surrender of the insurgent forces in Rio Bay.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if Her Majesty's Minister at Rio de Janeiro has confirmed the report of the cessation of the civil war in Brazil, and in such case if Her Majesty's Government will render all assistance possible to British traders to recoup the disastrous losses of the past six months of siege, and use its influence with the Brazilian Government to devote itself to the development of the riches of the country and the opening up of fresh channels for International trade?

The question of how to deal with claims of British subjects for losses arising out of the recent disturbances in Brazil is now being considered in consultation with the Law Officers of the Crown. The Government of Brazil cannot be asked to take advice from outside as to the development of their own country, but Her Majesty's Government are anxious to use every means in their power to promote trade with Brazil as soon as the political state of the country admits of it.

May I ask whether the Government have received any complaints from British residents as to the neglect of their interests; and, if so, is there any foundation for those complaints?

Is it true that Admiral da Gama has taken refuge on one of Her Majesty's ships?

Will the Government use its influence to obtain clement treatment for the officers and men of the Brazilian Navy who have surrendered?

I can only say, in answer to the last question, that Her Majesty's Government has been most careful to abstain from any interference whatever in what was a purely internal matter, and I cannot promise that they will interfere in the final settlement of the dispute. It is true that in disturbances of this kind persons not directly concerned must suffer. British trade is considerable, and it has suffered, and that has naturally given rise to many complaints which we have received; but I am sure that Her Majesty's Minister and the naval officers, who had a most difficult task to perform, have discharged their duties well, and done the utmost possible under the circumstances. With regard to Admiral da Gama, our latest information is that he is on board a Portuguese vessel, not a British ship.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce, at an early date, a Bill to carry out the Report from the Departmental Committee on the treatment of inebriates?

Instructions have been given to the Parliamentary draftsman to prepare a Bill for introduction to Parliament to (tarry out the recommendations of the Report of the Departmental Committee, and my hon. Friend the Under Secretary hopes to introduce the Bill at an early date.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will supply, by Return or otherwise, complete information as to the treatment of habitual inebriates in the various cantons of Switzerland?

A Report has just been received, and will be published in the Miscellaneous Series of Reports.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that in 1882 a Warrant was issued promising that majors of Artillery who served seven years as battery commanders would be made brevet lieutenant colonels, that in consequence of this Warrant a considerable number of officers were induced to remain in the Royal Artillery, and can he explain why this Rule has been suddenly abrogated, and if any complaints or remonstrances on this head have been addressed to the late or present Deputy Adjutant General of Artillery by those officers of one of the scientific corps who are now being rapidly superseded by their comrades of the Cavalry?

The brevet promotion referred to came to an end in 1885, and since 1887 its place has been taken by voluntary promotion to half-pay lieutenant colonelcies. I can only refer to the reply I made on February 20 to my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeenshire, to the effect that this half-pay promotion is almost obsolete, and that I do not see my way to re-open the question.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, seeing that the recent prosecution of Blackburn, commander of the trawler Ceylon, for trawling in inshore waters failed for a technicality, and that he was not tried for the offence itself, the Crown will institute proceedings again?

It is not quite correct to say that the prosecution failed for a technicality. I explained two days ago the reasons for which it was not further proceeded with, and looking to the lapse of time since the offence is alleged to have been committed, and to all that has taken place in the interval, it is not intended to institute a new prosecution in this particular case. As I previously stated, however, the law against illegal trawling is being, and will continue to be, strictly enforced.

When my right hon. Friend says he is not prepared to revive the proceedings, does he bear in mind the statement of the Sheriff I quoted the other day that this was a most flagrant case?

Any observation made by the Sheriff Substitute on that occasion must have been extra judicial, inasmuch as evidence had not been had in the case. As to whether it would or would not be possible to revive it I say nothing, because there are serious objections to reviving it under the circumstances.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he proposes to introduce a Bill to remedy the defects in the Irish Education Act of 1892 with respect to raising of the expenses of the School Attendance Committees under the Act?

A Bill is ready, and will be introduced at the earliest possible opportunity.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is prepared to state in detailed terms the amendments which he requires in the Public Libraries (Ireland) Act, which passed this House last year, with the object of enabling the Hill to be promoted without delay?

It would be impracticable to state in detailed terms, in reply to this question, the amendments which this Bill would require if introduced again in the same form in which it appeared last Session; but I may inform my hon. Friend that, in my opinion, a Bill to carry out the objects aimed at should be framed as nearly as possible on the lines of the Public Libraries Act, 1892 (the English Act), and the main points in which the Bill of last Session differed from that Act have already been pointed out to my hon. Friend.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assist me in drafting a Bill?

I am afraid I cannot do more than tender the advice I have already given.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board when the Rules and Regulations for the conduct of the London Vestry elections, under the Local Government Bill (England and Wales), will be issued; and whether the clerks to the various Vestries will be appointed returning officers for the Vestry elections in the same way as the clerks to the Unions are now the returning officers for the elections of Guardians?

The existing members of Vestries elected under the Metropolis Management Acts will continue in office until the elections which are to take place in November next have been held. The necessary Regulations will be issued in ample time for those elections, but I cannot at present state more precisely when they will be issued.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is now able to state the decision of the Government and to present the promised Correspondence about the question of simultaneous examinations for the Civil Service in India?

The question is under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government, but I am not yet in a position to announce their decision, or to present the Correspondence on the subject.

I do not wish to press the right hon. Gentleman unfairly, but is he aware that a month ago the late Under Secretary told us the Papers would be presented in a reasonable period, and that they were virtually complete?

said, he regretted that he was not yet in a position to present the Papers.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India when the promised Papers concerning the Mission of Sir Mortimer Durand to Kabul and the agreement with the Amir of Afghanistan will be laid upon the Table?

So soon as it can be done consistently with the interests of the Public Service I will cause these Papers to be presented to Parliament.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate can County Councils in Scotland, if they so resolve, hold their statutory meetings outside their respective counties?

I do not find any warrant in the Act for County Councils holding their statutory meetings outside their counties. Provision is made in the Act for Committees meeting outside the county, but there is no similar provision in regard to the meetings of County Councils.

Are we to presume they cannot meet outside their counties?

There is no statutory provision on the point.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, after holding a public inquiry last April, the Education Department issued to the borough of Eastbourne on 24th June a final notice for 1,311 places, which expired on 24th July; whether on 10th August last the only proposals before the Department for supplying this deficiency were for 968 places, or 343 less than the expired final notice demanded; whether the Commissioners who held the public inquiry reported that an annual increase of 140 places would be necessary to meet the growth of population, and whether a Wesleyan school for 365 children has been lately closed; whether at this moment the only school provision made or undertaken is for 464 places at Norway, 496 at Up-wick, and 540 at Whitley Road, or 1,500 in all, leaving a present deficiency, including the 140 and the 365 places, of 516 places, even if these schools wore all open; whether he is aware that the Upwick School is not yet finished, and the Whitley Road School not begun; whether the Department received from the School Attendance Committee of Eastbourne a Resolution declaring that the Whitley Road site was eminently unsuitable; whether all the proposed schools comply with the Rules of planning of the Department; whether he can state the contract price for each school; why the Department did not give effect to the procedure provisions of the Act of 1870 in July last in the case of Eastbourne; and whether they will now proceed to enforce those provisions without further delay?

The public inquiry held at Eastbourne last year settled 1,311 places as the deficiency to be supplied. Since then a further deficiency of 365 places (making a total deficiency of 1,676) has been caused by the closure of the Wesleyan School last month. The final notice expired on the 5th of August, 1893. A committee of voluntary managers undertook to supply the deficiency, and submitted plans for three schools: (1) At Norway Hamlet for 464 children; (2) at Upwick for 496 children, and (3) at Whitley Road for 761 children, or 1,721 places in all to meet the deficiency of 1,676. The sites of all three schools were approved as suitable. The first of the three new schools is finished and open, and the building of both the others is now well advanced. After the Whitley Road site had been approved, and the contract for the building signed, an objection to the sire was raised by the Eastbourne School Attendance Committee, but the Department did not see any reason to alter their decision. The contract prices of the three schools are £1,989 10s., £2,180, and £3,530 respectively. In view of complaints made as to the new schools, the Department sent an architect to Eastbourne a few days ago to make a special inquiry. He reports that due despatch is being used in the work; that the building, both in the school already built, which is certainly very unornamental, and in the two now in progress, is in conformity with the plans sanctioned by the Department: and that the latter will be completed by the 15th of May as regards the Upwick School, 15th of June as regards the boys' and girls' departments of the Whitley Road School, and July 16th as regards the infants' department of that school. It is the duty of the Department under the Act, in the case of an ascertained deficiency, to order the formation of a School Board if it appears that, after due notice, the deficiency is not in course of being supplied with due despatch. So far due despatch seems to have been used, and the Department will continue to exercise all vigilance to see that it is maintained, both in respect of completing the work now in progress and of meeting such further deficiency as arises from time to time owing to growth of population.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if the architect he sent down satisfied himself as to the substantial character of the schools, as well as with their compliance as to space requirements?

Yes; I asked him that myself. The schools come within the Rules as to new buildings.

Then, in spite of all the irritation, the people of Eastbourne have complied with the Act in every respect?

I do not know what the hon. Gentleman means by "in spite of all the irritation." They have raised a good round sum of money, and are building the schools.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there are any Rules for the guidance of Assistant Labour Commissioners as to the nature of statements made to them by witnesses, and which ought or ought not to be inserted in their Reports presented to this House; whether complaints alleged to have been made by a mill manager at Port Glasgow, and set out on page 193 of the Reports of the Lady Assistant Commissioners dealing with the employment of women, in which 1,500 women workers in Mill 54 are stated to be chiefly low class Irish, who are intemperate and immoral, should have been admitted, seeing that further on in the Report the Assistant Commissioner states that she saw no evidence of the immorality alleged; and what steps are taken to verify statements made to the Assistant Commissioners before these statements are printed and circulated?

I am informed by the Chairman of the Labour Commission that, so far as he is aware, it has not been the practice to make any Rules for the guidance of Assistant Commissioners as to the nature of the statements made by witnesses which are to be included in their Reports. The senior Lady Assistant Commissioner was entrusted by the Commission with the duty of supervising generally the Reports of the Assistant Commissioners, and it is believed that this duty has been satisfactorily performed. It is impossible for the Commission as a body to investigate the reliability of the evidence given to the Lady Assistant Commissioners.

Is there any remedy open to persons who feel themselves aggrieved by these statements?

I am not in a position to answer that question.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether the existing contract for the supply of clothing for Irish Post Office officials is held by a private firm; and, if so, when the contract was entered into, and when it will expire; whether, on its expiration, an opportunity will be given to Irish firms to tender for the contract: and whether it would be possible to arrange that the material for the clothing should be of Irish manufacture, assuming that equally good material could be supplied at the same price?

The present contract for the supply of Post Office uniform clothing in Ireland is for three years, and expires on the 31st instant. It is held by an Irish firm. The new contract, like the present one, will be made by the War Department on behalf of the Post Office; and it is understood that tenders have already been invited. I am not aware that any condition has been made as to the place where the material for the clothing should be manufactured.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the existing contract for the supply of clothing to the Royal Irish Constabulary is held by a private firm, or whether the Force is supplied from a Government clothing factory; when the existing contract was entered into, and when it will expire; whether on its expiration an opportunity will be given to Irish firms to tender for the contract; and whether it would be possible to arrange that the material for the clothing should be of Irish manufacture, assuming that equally good material could be supplied at the same price?

The Inspector General informs me that all contracts for the clothing of the Constabulary are given to private firms. The existing contract was entered into on March 1, 1893, and will expire on March 31, 1895; it is held by an Irish firm. On its expiration tenders for a new contract will, as on former occasions, be invited by advertisement in the public Press, and Irish firms will be afforded an opportunity of tendering. With regard to the last paragraph of the question, I learn that some years ago Irish woollen manufacturers were invited by advertisement to inspect the standard great-coat cloth at the Constabulary Office, with a view to their proposing to supply the same; that three manufacturers responded to the advertisement, and stated that, with the exception of great-coat cloth, it would not suit their trade to undertake its manufacture. Samples of this cloth were subsequently received from two of the traders, but the results were unsatisfactory. I should be glad if it were possible to arrange for the manufacture in Ireland of the material for Constabulary uniform, or even a portion thereof, but in order to bring this about it would be necessary that the standard of quality should be maintained without increase of price.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Report of the Bovine Tuberculosis Commission is ready or when it may be expected?

In reply to my inquiry, I am informed that the work of the Royal Commission on Tuberculosis is being proceeded with with all possible speed, and that it is hoped that the Report will be issued shortly.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether large quantities of manufactured goods, mainly produced by unpaid convict prison labour in Germany, are frequently surreptitiously imported into those Kingdoms, and whether the carriage is cheapened by preferential rates; and whether he will have inquiry made into this matter as affecting the industrial progress and taxpaying interest of this country?

We understand that prison labour is used in some industrial productions in Germany, but the Board of Trade have received no complaints in the matter. I am assured that there are no surreptitious imports into this country, and we are not aware of any preferential rates on German manufactures.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the European Commission of the Danube continues to perform the duties imposed on it by Article 16 of the Treaty of Paris, 1856, and Article 53 of the Treaty of Berlin, 1878, to clear the mouths of the Danube and the neighbouring parts of the sea from sands or other impediments, to facilitate the navigation, and to exercise its powers as far as Galatz in complete independence of the territorial authorities; whether there is any foundation for the statements recently made in the Press that Russia, as one of the territorial authorities on one of the banks of the Kilia arm of the river, has objected to the Commission exercising its powers in complete independence of her, and has proposed to exclude it altogether from independent action in the Kilia arm: whether, in view of the great importance of the Kilia arm as commanding the whole trade of the Danube, and as affecting the prosperity of Roumania, Her Majesty's Government will use its influence to cause that arm to be kept clear and open for navigation; and whether any Papers relating to the subject can be laid upon the Table of the House?

I am afraid I can only again refer the hon. Member to the Treaty of London of 1883 for details connected with the Kilia branch of the Danube. We have no reason to suppose that the Russians intend to undertake any operations as regards the Kilia mouth, and Her Majesty's Government see no reason for raising any question connected with the European Commission of the Danube at the present time. Reports are received from Her Majesty's Representative on the Commission from time to time, but they deal mainly with details connected with the navigation of the river, and there will be no object in laying them upon the Table of the House.

Am I to understand that under the Berlin Act of 1883 the general powers of the Commission are maintained? Is it not a fact that a, Protocol attached to the Treaty especially affirms this right?

I have not a copy of the Treaty before me. If the hon. Member has read the Treaty I will accept his statement that he is quoting it correctly.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether there has been a Correspondence between Sir William Marriott, Lord Cromer, and Lord Rosebery on the subject of the claims of Zobehr Pasha against the Egyptian Government, and whether there is any objection to laying the Correspondence upon the Table of the House; whether Sir William Marriott has suggested a Parliamentary or judicial inquiry into the matter; and whether Her Majesty's Government intends to accede to that suggestion?

Such a Correspondence has taken place, and Sir William Marriott has suggested a Parliamentary or judicial inquiry into the matter in this country. Her Majesty's Government do not think such a procedure would be suitable or desirable, and cannot, therefore, support the suggestion. The question is, in their opinion, one for decision by the Egyptian Government or Tribunals, and it would serve, no useful purpose to lay the Correspondence before the House.

On behalf of the hon. Member for West Marylebone, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the practice whereby the chief and other clerks of the London and Sheerness Police Courts receive and retain for their own use, in addition to their salaries, certain fees for supplying copies of depositions to prosecutors and others; and whether he can state if this practice is authorised by any statutory authority?

I am aware of the practice referred to, which has existed for many years with the cognisance of the Treasury and Exchequer and Audit Department. I am not aware of any express statutory authority under which the fees in question are payable to the clerks; but it is a matter of great importance in the interests of justice that copies of depositions should be prepared rapidly and accurately for the use of prosecutors and others; and as the making of these copies is outside the official duties of the Police Court clerks, the Metropolitan Police Magistrates have, with my own and my predecessor's approval, sanctioned the existing scale of fees. I may add that I have had recently under my consideration the whole question of the remuneration of the Police Court clerks, and proposals are now being weighed under which the fees in question would be transferred to the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District.

Is it not a fact that the salaries of these valuable public servants are limited by Statute to what many people think a very moderate sum?

They were so limited; I do not know what they stand at at the present moment.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government have now come to a decision on the Uganda Question; and whether any action will be taken in carrying out any decision of the Government before the opportunity has been given for a full discussion of the subject in the House of Commons?

As was stated on Tuesday, the Government will communicate their decision with reference to Uganda soon after Easter, and an opportunity will be given to discuss it. No instructions have been sent to put matters on a different footing in Uganda to that on which they were left by Sir G. Portal, and unless any unforeseen emergency should arise it is not intended to send any till after the decision has been announced to the House.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if it will be necessary, notwithstanding the passing of the new Local Government Act, for the Parish Vestries to appoint new Overseers and Highway Surveyors to hold office till next November; and if the Local Government Board intend shortly to issue Circulars instructing the various Local Authorities as to their powers and duties under the new Act?

My answer to the hon. Member for South Norfolk deals with the first point in this question. As regards the second, the Local Government Board have issued Circulars to Boards of Guardians, Urban Sanitary Authorities, and Highway Authorities explaining the position of matters as regards elections in the current year. The Board are preparing other Circulars, which will be issued very shortly.

The words "till November" are used, but will not the officers now to be appointed hold office till March next?

I must ask for notice of that.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he will assent to a quarterly Return, commencing from 1st January, 1894, and giving the names of schools from which the Department have threatened to withhold the Parliamentary Grant, and specifying the matters of complaint on account of which this course has been taken?

This question was only put down last night, but I can say generally that I think a quarterly Return from the 1st of next month can be given, which will meet in the main what the noble Lord asks for.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether, under the Rules laid down by the Declaration of Paris, 1856, those Powers which have abstained from agreeing to and are not bound by it would, in the event of their being at war with Great Britain, retain their right, under the Law of Nations, to fit out and use privateers against British commerce, and also their right to capture British goods in neutral vessels, whether those goods were contraband of war or not; whether, in such an event, Great Britain, having agreed to the Declaration, and being bound to it as towards all the other Powers who have also agreed to it, would have the right to capture her enemy's goods in neutral vessels belonging to such other Powers; or whether she would be hound to refrain from exercising that right as against her enemy while submitting to its exercise as against herself; and whether he can state what Powers have up to this lime abstained from agreeing to the Declaration of Paris?

The first two inquiries of the hon. Member relate to certain legal questions with reference to hypothetical cases which the hon. Member puts and as to which my opinion is asked. I consider that I am not bound to answer these questions, which do not relate to any matter under the consideration of this House, nor is it for the public interest that I should do so. I therefore respectfully decline to answer them. As to the third question, which is one of fact, I have to state that the United States of America, Spain, and some of the South American States are the principal Powers which have not up to this time agreed to the Declaration of Paris.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in addition to the sum of £15,000 proposed to be allocated for the establishment of a Veterinary College in Dublin, he is pro-pared to moderately endow the institution as one appertaining to technical education in Ireland?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question, may I impure whether the Government propose to give for the benefit of veterinary science in Scotland a grant corresponding to the £15,000; and, if not, why not?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will allow me to answer the question. I do not think it is possible to add to the proposed grant of £15,000 any proposal for the endowment of the institution. I may inform the hon. Member who put the supplementary question that the money to be granted for the purposes of this college is not Imperial money, but that it comes from a certain Irish fund intended for purely Irish purposes. It does not follow that Scotland should have a like grant.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government are considering a scheme for the establishment of a Board of Agriculture for Ireland, which was promised favourable consideration by the late Premier?

(who replied) said: My right hon. Friend the Member for Midlothian, in answering a similar question a short time ago, said—

"We have no proposal to make upon the subject, but shall be triad to find some opportunity of considering a plan for that purpose. I should like, however, to see the evidence taken before a Select Committee, which I\ hope the House would appoint, before consenting to a proposal for the establishment of a board of Agriculture for Ireland."

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has received a Memorial from the General Council of the London Chamber of Commerce reciting that, owing to the extremely unsatisfactory state of the silver question, and the grave injury inflicted upon our Eastern trade by the heavy fall and violent fluctuations in exchange, and the great uncertainty as to the future, it was desirable that Her Majesty's Government should take such steps as would lead to the meeting of another International, Conference; and whether the Government has this communication, which refers to an injury suffered by a trade amounting to nearly £250,000,000 annually, under its consideration?

I have received the Memorial to which my hon. Friend refers. I have already stated that the Government have received no intimation of any desire of any Foreign Government for the reassembling of the Monetary Conference, and they themselves have no intention of milking any such proposal.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the last paragraph of the question.

I said I had received the Memorial.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will suggest to the Indian Government the expediency of raising their Revenue by the taxation of German, French, and other Foreign imports, and admitting British goods as heretofore?

Differential duties existed in the time of the East India Company; hut all distinction between goods of British and those of foreign origin was swept away by the Tariff of 1859; and it is not, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, expedient to return to the former practice.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the colonies of France, Germany, and other countries do make special conditions in favour of the Mother Country?

Yes; but J am not prepared to say their fiscal system is better than ours.

I beg to ask whether it is true that the Prime Minister, being a Peer and Lord Lieutenant for the County of Edinburgh, is to address a public meeting on political topics in Edinburgh during the present week; whether, a new Writ having been issued for the Leith District, situated within the county, and in close proximity to the City of Edinburgh, the conduct of the Prime Minister is not calculated to influence the election; and whether such conduct does not fall within the spirit and letter of the Sessional Order touching the interference of Peers and Lord Lieutenants in Parliamentary elections?