I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if his attention has been called to the ease of Neil MacDougall, of Saddell, who obtained a decree against his landlord through the Court of Session for the destruction of his house in 1889, but without an order for costs against the defendant; and whether, under these circumstances, the landlord is entitled to detain the amount (£40 1s. ld) on account of costs incurred in his defence, or whether he is bound to pay the money decreed to the plaintiff by the Court, and pay his own costs out of his own pocket?

I have no knowledge of this case, but from the statements in the question it appears to involve a dispute between two private individuals in regard to a money claim, a matter with which I have no power to interfere.

Is not the unsuccessful party to an action bound to carry out the order of the Court?

was understood to reply in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the Report for the year 1893 of the Head Constable of Liverpool, and to the statement there in that, although during last year 831 houses in that city were convicted as brothels, it, has been found impossible, owing to the inadequacy of the present? law, to render a single owner or agent of such property responsible for its use, or even for its continued use, for immoral purposes; and whether any representations have leached him from the Watch Committee of Liverpool regarding the urgent necessity for an alteration in the law on the subject, if owners and agents who allow their houses to be used for such purposes are to be made amenable; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government propose to take immediate steps to remedy the present state of things by the introduction of a Bill on the lines suggested by the authorities at Liverpool or otherwise?

My attention has been called to the Report of the Head Constable for Liverpool, and the statements in question as to disorderly houses in that city, and I have received a representation from the Watch Committee, which has received careful consideration; and, after consulting with the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, I have come to the conclusion that it is not necessary to legislate on the subject, as, in my opinion, the law is at present sufficient to meet these cases if properly and rigorously administered.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he is aware that, in the case of trespass for game tried on 13th February last before I Sheriff Hill at Dingwall, in which Baron Middleton of Applecross was the plaintiff, and William Mackenzie, Ardneaskan, was defendant, the only witness for the prosecution was a game watcher named Macbeath, who admitted that his knowledge of English was very limited, while Sheriff Hill, who sentenced Mackenzie, had no knowledge of Gaelic; and whether there is any interpreter attached to the Court House at Dingwall; if not, whether it is proposed to engage the services of competent interpreters at those places where Sheriffs are ignorant of the language of the people?

I communicated with Ross-shire when this question appeared upon the Paper, hut I regret to have to say that a reply has not yet been received, and I must therefore ask my hon. Friend to postpone the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he is now prepared to state the result of his inquiry into the condition of affairs in the Park District of the Island of Lewis, where, owing to the non-completion of footpaths, huge numbers of children are unable to attend school during severe weather; and whether he is aware that the children of Grimshader and Cromore have been withdrawn from school for want of footpaths?

As I have already stated in reply to the hon. Member, the large proportion of £2,000 out of the £3,000 grant to Ross and Cromarty was allocated to the Island of Lewis. The expenditure of this special grant was entrusted to the County Council, who elected to devote £1,033 to the construction of footpaths to schools, including those at Grimshader and Cromore, in the Parish of Lochs. The responsibility for the proper expenditure undoubtedly rests with the County Council. Upon inquiry, I regret to learn that the present attendance at some of the schools is not so good as it should be, but I fail to see any reasonable cause, as the approaches to such schools arc, with the assistance which has been rendered, in a better position than they were last year, and the winter season is over. In the new Local Government Amendment Bill I propose to give power to enable County Councils to construct cart roads, footpaths, and footbridges in accordance with the provisions of the Roads and Bridges Act, 1878.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the Rules and Regulations governing the management of the Invergorden Ferry are disregarded by the lessee; that passengers using the present ferry boat incur great inconvenience and risk; and that the landing piers are in a dangerous condition; and whether it is proposed, in the forthcoming Local Government Bill for Scotland, to provide that this and other ferries, as well as piers, in the Highlands, now in the bands of private individuals, shall be placed under the control of the County Councils?

I have not received any representation in regard to the management of Invergordon Ferry referred to by the hon. Member. I propose to deal with the regulation of ferries in the Local Government Amendment Bill.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to a case, which is reported in The Standard newspaper of 31st January last as having been hoard in the Queen's Bench Division, in which a passenger sued the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway for 4s., being the sum charged in excess of the maximum authorised by the Company's Acts between Victoria and Calais on an ordinary first-class ticket, and in which the money was paid into Court by the Company; whether he can state what number of passengers travelled between Loudon and Calais by this route during the year 1893; whether he will take steps, under the provisions of 7 & 8 Vict., c. 85, s. 17, to prevent such overcharge in future; and what are the Acts under the provisions of which the Company's charges are made?

I have seen a report of the case referred to by my hon. Friend. The Board of Trade are not in possession of the necessary information to enable me to reply to paragraphs 2 and 4 of the question. With regard to the legal pro- ceedings, I am informed by the Railway Company that the ease is still subjudice, and it would appear From a newspaper report that the Court has made an Order which enables the plaintiff to obtain a decision by a more convenient method than that provided by 7 & 8 Vict. The powers of that Act should only be used in very exceptional circumstances.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the case of "Pridham v. Jennings," heard before the Magistrates at Stratton, North Cornwall, on Monday the 12th instant, where the prisoner, accused of a trifling offence, elected to be tried summarily, and was so tried, pleading not guilty: the Bench disagreed, one Magistrate saying the accused ought to be discharged, and left the Bench, followed by another Magistrate: the two remaining Magistrates committed the accused to take his trial at Bodmin Quarter Sessions, a long distance from Kilkhampton, where the accused and his witnesses live, and without railway communication; and did the Magistrates act within their powers by committing the accused after trying him with his consent under the summary jurisdiction procedure; and, if not, will he take steps in the matter?

I have inquired into the facts of the case referred to, and find that the circumstances are not quite accurately stated in the question. It is true that the Magistrates at first intended to deal with the case summarily with the consent of the defendant, and that subsequently they determined to commit for trial. I am advised that in so doing the Magistrates did not exceed their legal powers, and that the previous determination to deal with the case summarily does not render the subsequent committal for trial void. It is, of course, a serious irregularity that a man should be committed for trial without the caution required by law being administered to him, and his Statement, if any, taken down in writing; but it is open to the prisoner to use in his defence this or any other irregularity by which he may have been prejudiced. I see no ground for interference at the present stage of the proceedings, which will, no doubt, go on in due course of law.

I bog to ask the Lord Advocate if he has seen a copy of the correspondence between the Procurator Fiscal of Lochmaddy and Sir John Campbell Orde, proprietor of North Uist, and his agents, regarding a residence for the former at Lochmaddy; whether he is prepared to take any steps to adjust the matter in dispute; and whether a landlord has power by law to deprive a public official, who must live in a certain locality, of the right to a suitable residence on his estate?

I have seen a, copy of the correspondence referred to, and I gather from it that Sir John Orde declines to give the Procurator Fiscal a feu on which to erect a house. This appears to me to be very unfortunate, but the question of providing residences for officials in the Highlands is a large one, and would require legislation, as there is no other way in which a proprietor could be compelled to grant ground for such a residence.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether it is the intention of the Government to build an addition to Barlinnie Prison, to hold 260 prisoners, although there is accommodation for more than that number in the existing prison buildings in Scotland, if prisoners were more equally distributed among the different prisons; and whether, in the interests of economy, he will consider the advisability of utilising existing prisons by distributing prisoners more equally among them, instead of erecting new buildings while existing ones are not full?

It is not proposed to enlarge Barlinnie Prison beyond the number of cells originally intended—namely, 1,000, that is, 200 more than at present. It is very desirable that prisoners should be detained in their own districts, and frequent removal of parties of prisoners to distant prisons is opposed to the policy of the 1877 Act, and the course hitherto adopted in regard to the re-arrangement of prisons in Scotland.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he will explain what is the cause of the delay in establishing the post office at Finnor promised by him last June?

The authority for establishing a post office at Finnor, County Westmeath, has been cancelled under circumstances which I recently explained in a letter to the hon. Member for North Westmeath.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, with reference to the Memorial recently presented to him from a considerable number of the inhabitants of Balbriggan and the surrounding district for permission to the Great Northern Railway Company of Ireland to run a passenger carriage with a goods train from Drogheda to Dublin, whether he will reconsider his refusal to grant the prayer of the Memorial referred to, in view of the fact that the company are willing to carry out the suggested arrangement, that that arrangement would involve a saving of time and money to a considerable mercantile community, and that a similar arrangement was till recently in force without any injurious consequences in the shape of railway accidents?

I consulted the Railway Inspecting Officers upon the Memorial referred to by the hon. Member, and they were unanimously of opinion that it is most objectionable to attach a passenger carriage to a goods train. I am, in consequence of this advice, unwilling to take the responsibility of acceding to the prayer of the Petitioners. The Memorialists should consider whether it is not more expedient to urge the Railway Company to give additional facilities than to press the Board of Trade to revoke an Order made for the protection of the public.

Does the right hon. Gentleman take into account the character of this railway?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman we are most anxious to do everything we possibly can to meet the convenience of the inhabitants, but we look on these mixed trains as most dangerous.

But is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the fact that no accident occurred when a similar arrangement was in force?

A Paper will be laid on the Table showing accidents which have occurred under these arrangements.

But there have been none on this line?

I cannot say that.

If none have occurred, will that alter the right hon. Gentleman's attitude?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the new Registration Bill will apply to Ireland, or whether Irish Registration Law will be dealt with in a separate measure?

I think it must be the desire of the Representatives of Ireland of all sections that the question of Irish registration should be dealt with in the measure that applies to England, and therefore the President of the Local Government Board will propose to introduce into the English measure a provision for the amendment of the Irish Registration Law. But I do not want to commit myself absolutely on the point.

Upon what ground does the right hon. Gentleman state that this is the desire of all sections of the Irish Representatives? I am not aware that any opinion has been expressed on the point.

I understood that that was so, but perhaps I have misunderstood the right hon. Gentleman and his friends.

And the hon. Member for Longford!

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman has considered the fact that the Irish Registration Law is totally different from the English and the Scotch, and is most complicated at the present moment?

The complication to which the hon. Member refers is a very good reason for trying to simplify the law. But I think the hon. Member should wait till he sees our attempt, and finds whether our provisions meet the Irish case before he takes objection.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the complication to which I have alluded is the result of attempting to amend the Irish Registration Law in English Acts?

I am not aware of that.

I should like to ask whether the Bill will apply to England and to Ireland in the sense that it will establish the doctrine of one vote one value?

The hon. Member must see that the time for raising questions of that kind is when the Bill is brought in.

I bog to ask the Postmaster General whether he will make inquiry as to the desirability of establishing telegraph service with Hilltown, which is an important centre in the County of Down?

The question of an extension of the telegraphs to Hilltown was considered in 1891. It was then found that it would not be remunerative, and it could not, therefore, be carried out except under a guarantee, which was not forthcoming. I shall be glad to make renewed inquiry on the subject, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whet her his attention has been called to a statement, contained in a speech delivered at Staffin Skye on the 9th instant by the Rev. Duncan Mackenzie, to the effect that, although the Education Department had decreed the exaction of peats from children attending public schools to be illegal, he had repeatedly during this winter met voting children of six and seven carrying peats to school: and whether he will inquire into this alleged infraction of the order of the Department?

The speech to which the hon. Member refers gives no particulars, and does not state the name of any School Board in the district of which the rule has been contravened. If any such contravention is brought to my knowledge, I shall call the attention of the School Board to the rule.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has been informed of the recent collision between fishermen of Tollesbury and those of Burnham, in Essex, who were removing culch from, the public fishing ground, to the great detriment of oyster culture thereon; and whether he is aware that the Crown is the owner of the soil of such ground; and, if so, whether he will advise the putting in force of the Crown rights to protect the public grounds from such depredation in future?

I have heard with regret of the collision which has taken place between certain fishermen of Tollesbury and Burnham. It has not, however, as yet been possible to ascertain the full particulars of the occurrence and the precise locality from which the culch is alleged to have been taken, but I am making inquiries.

Assuming that the Crown is the owner of the soil on these grounds, will the right hon. Gentleman enforce the Crown rights?

I can say no more till I have the details before me.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether the Colonial Department has communicated to him the representations of the Canadian Government as to the freedom of the Dominion of Canada from pleuropneumonia in cattle; and, if so, whether he will issue an Order forthwith, allowing cattle from Canadian ports to be landed without being subject to slaughter or quarantine?

I received the Papers to which my hon. Friend refers on Friday last, and I am giving my most careful consideration to the representations by the Canadian Government which are contained therein. There are, however, one or two matters still upon which I wish to receive information from the Dominion Authorities, and until this is available I shall not be able to say definitely what course it will be my duty to take in the matter. I quite recognise, however, the desirability of my decision being made known at an early dale, and I have written to the Colonial Office to ask that I may receive the information in question as speedily as possible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the Table of the House the Papers relating to this matter?

When I have received the answer from the Colonial Office I shall be glad to consider whether the Correspondence can be laid on the Table.

I bog to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is the intention of the Government to bring in a Bill for giving effect to the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Gresham University Draft Charter, or to take any other steps in relation thereto?

The recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Gresham University Draft Charter are receiving the careful attention of the Government, but the question as to giving effect to them must depend to a certain extent upon the unanimity shown by the different bodies interested in accepting the recommendations.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government of Marshal Peixoto have given compensation for the deaths of the three British officers who were killed by the deliberate explosion of a magazine on Guberuador Island in November last?

The Brazilian Government have not given any compensation, but, as has already been explained, we have no evidence to show that the explosion was an act of deliberation.

Has the request for compensation been refused by the Brazilian Government?

I stated on a previous occasion in this House that the question of compensation would have to be dealt with when the civil conflict in Brazil came to an end. The only addition I can make to it is that we have no evidence it was an act of deliberation.

Are the Government prepared to press this question of compensation?

I have said the question of compensation is reserved to be dealt with when the present civil conflict comes to an end.

Then it is not settled yet?

No.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the promised Papers with regard to Siamese affairs will be issued to Parliament?

I can only refer the hon. Member to the statement I made in this House yesterday, and that we are waiting to lay the Papers until we are quite sure the proceedings connected with the alleged murder of a French official has come to an end.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he can state the number of Savings Bank withdrawals by telegraph during each month since the introduction of the system, and the average interval between the application of the depositor and the payment of the sum withdrawn?

The new arrangements for withdrawing deposits by telegraph from the Post Office Savings Bank came into operation on the 1st December last. The number of withdrawals in December was 1,228, in January 1,446, and in February 1,798, making a total for the first three months of 4,472 withdrawals. In 3,774 cases repayment was required on the same day. The average inverval between the application of the depositor and the payment of the money was 38 minutes in London, and between 50 and 60 minutes for the rest of the United Kingdom.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to whom Questions relating to the proceedings of the Charity Commissioners should he addressed pending the appointment of a Parliamentary Commissioner in succession to the hon. Member for Merionethshire; and when such appointment is likely to be made?

The appointment of a Parliamentary Charity Commissioner in succession to the hon. Member for Merionethshire will very soon take place, and in the meantime my right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Council will answer in the House of Commons questions concerning the Charity Commissioners.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that no copy of the Army (Annual) Bill can be obtained in the Vote Office: and whether he proposes to ask the House to read a second time a Bill which it has never seen?

I have ascertained that there are no copies to be obtained, but for the information of the hon. Member I may say—what the Chancellor of the Exchequer pointed out last night—that the Second Reading stage of the Army (Annual) Bill is exempt from the ordinary considerations. It is a stage which has never been opposed in this House, and I will repeat my promise of last night that the Committee stage will be put down after Easter. That is the proper occasion for making changes in the Bill, and on that stage the matter can be discussed. Copies of the Bill will, of course, he available for hon. Members before that.

Inasmuch as the right hon. Gentleman proposes to ask us to read a second time a Bill we have not seen, will he undertake that the Committee stage shall not be taken after midnight, but at some hour when there may be adequate discussion?

Yes.

I beg to ask if the Government have yet considered the Report of the Sea Fisheries Bill, and when it is intended to introduce legislation?

The recommendations of the Select Committee on Sea Fisheries involve very important principles and also an International Convention, and I am not prepared, in the existing pressure of legislation, to state at present when legislation on the subject can be proposed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland when he proposes to take the discussion on the Select Committee on the working of the Irish Land Acts?

I quite understand the desire of the hon. and learned Member that this matter should not be rushed. I will undertake that the discussion on the question of the Select Committee will not be taken before the first week after Easter.

I am sorry to have to ask the indulgence of the House, but I desire to make a statement partly personal to myself and partly affecting the Department which I represent in this House. There is a letter of a, very unusual character from a Member of this House (the Member for West Belfast) in The Times to-day. I have nothing to do with the first part of that letter, in which he refers to a Motion which stood in his name on the Navy Estimates for Monday and Tuesday nights. He says it was the only one passed over. I may remark that according to the Forms of the House there was only one Motion that could be put. That Motion was negatived. Hon. Members who wished to deal with other Motions duly rose in their place to catch the eye of the Deputy Speaker, but I do not know whether the hon. Member for West Belfast did so, or what measures he took to call attention to the subject. The Motion was as follows:—

"That, in the opinion of this House, the information given to Parliament by the Parliamentary representatives of the Admiralty with respect to naval matters is misleading and unsatisfactory, and is not calculated either to inform Parliament or to promote the welfare of the Royal Navy."

The hon. Gentleman, in his letter to The Times, says this—

"What I desired to point out was briefly this —that without, I believe, one single exception every answer which has been given to me during the last eight months by representatives of the Admiralty has been absolutely at variance with the facts, has been calculated to mislead the House of Commons and the country with regard to important matters of fact, and has to my knowledge misled and misinformed many persons."

I think that the House will agree with me that the letter is of an unusual character for any Member of this House to address to a newspaper, and I do not know how many newspapers, with respect to the representative of a Government Department in this House. I am not going to discuss the matter now. I have given notice to my hon. Friend that I intended to take notice of his letter in the House to-day. I am sorry that the notice given was necessarily brief, and that he is not in his place. I wish to say, first of all, that before I give an answer to any question in this House I always endeavour to sift the matter to the bottom and obtain the best information that I can. Of course, I am dependent on the very trustworthy officials of the Admiralty for the information that I give to the House in reply to the numerous questions put down. My hon. Friend alludes specially to an instance of a question which I answered in respect to the Royal Marine Division at Chatham. With regard to that particular instance, I had the advantage, I may inform the House, of seeing the Colonel Commandant at Chatham, and subsequently I saw the Deputy-Adjutant-General of the Royal Marines, and thoroughly satisfied myself that the facts which I gave the House were correct. I saw the Deputy-Adjutant-General of Marines again today, and I am able to stand to the answer as not having been misleading, but absolutely accurate from beginning to end. I really do not need to say more than that, except this—that I was perfectly prepared on Monday and Tuesday evenings to meet my hon. Friend on the subject of his Motion, and if he will do that which I think should be done when an imputation of this kind has been made on any Member of this House, if he will bring the matter forward in the House, I shall be prepared to meet him and substantiate the answers I have given.

As a matter of indulgence, I should like to say that I am quite sure my hon. Friend did not impute to my right hon. Friend anything personal in the statement he has made as to the information being accurate. I believe he is not in London and has not received the notice forwarded as to this matter being mentioned. When he returns, I have no doubt he will be prepared to offer an explanation, which I hope will be satisfactory.

asked whether in the case of a Motion being brought forward relative to the insufficiency of the answers the right hon. Gentleman would procure an opportunity for discussion?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the majority of the Guardians of Cootehill Union have persistently refused to make a scheme for providing suitable dwellings and allotments under the Labourers Acts; whether several labourers have frequently asked the Local Government Board for an inquiry under the provisions of the amended Act; is the Local Government Board aware that three-fifths of the elected Guardians are in favour of making a scheme; and whether the Local Government Board, after the proceeding of the Guardians on 23rd February, will order an inquiry forthwith?

I have been informed that the Guardians of this Union have up to the present time declined to act on representations made to them under the Labourers Acts. Complaints from individual labourers have occasionally been received by the Local Government Board, but it was only during this month that application was made for an inquiry under the provisions of Section 5 of the amended Act. The Board is not aware that three-fifths of the elected Guardians are in favour of making' a scheme, but a proposal for such a scheme was defeated at a meeting of the Guardians by 13 votes to 11. The question of holding an inquiry in the district will, on the receipt by the Local Government Board of certain documents which they require to be furnished with by the Guardians, be considered.

Is it not the case that in the Cootehill Union, as well as in the Bailyborough Union, there are a large number of non-elected ex officio Guardians who are opposed to the administration of these Acts; and will he, taking the serious reports as to the condition of labourers' dwellings in these Unions into consideration, endeavour to increase the number of popularly-elected Guardians?

I will direct the attention of the Irish Local Government Board to the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether compensation has yet been paid to those evicted tenants on the De Freyne estate whose goods were confiscated by members of the Constabulary; and, if not, will he direct that no further delay be allowed to take place in the matter?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy, in reply to a question on the same subject on the 21st of December, stated that inquiry had been directed with a view to ascertaining whether the charges preferred against the police had any foundation in fact. These charges have been carefully investigated on the spot by the Divisional Commissioner, who is the highest officer in the district, and he has arrived at the conclusion that there is no foundation for them. I concur in the opinion that the case against the police has been disproved after examining this officer's Report and the statements made by the persons concerned. It is a fact, however, that one constable was charged with larceny while on patrol duty. He pleaded guilty, was convicted and punished, and dismissed the Force.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will grant a Return of the number and names of the persons employed in the High Court of Justice in Ireland who have attained the age limit fixed for retirement in the Civil Service?

I have given instructions that a letter be written to the hon. Member stating there would be no objection to a Return of the kind asked for if moved for in the usual way. It will be necessary to substitute for the words following "in Ireland" the words "above the age of 65 years."

I will make that change.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why a tenant farmer in Ireland, the Poor Law valuation of whose holding is £7, could obtain a loan of £50 from the Board of Public Works for the improvement of his holding two years ago, but cannot now obtain more than £21?

it is true that for a certain period anterior to 1891 a tenant-farmer could have obtained a loan of £50 on a farm valued or judicially rented at £7, but this under conditions. The highest loan permitted since 1891 was £35, or five times the valuation or judicial rent, and a loan to that amount can still be obtained on a £7 holding if one of three conditions is fulfilled, namely: (I) If the landlord postpones rent to the Board's loan; (2) if satisfactory collateral security is offered; (3) if the rent is so low as to be virtually nominal. If none of these conditions are fulfilled, the limit of the loan would be three times the valuation or judicial rent, but, as the minimum loan permitted under the Land Law Act is £35, no loan of £21 could be granted.

Is it not inadvisable that the Irish people should be allowed to suffer owing to the action which the House of Lords have taken. Can the right hon. Gentleman afford the House an opportunity of considering the question?

We have been anxious to secure an amendment of the law by which the loan could be secured on the holding in view of the possibility of evictions.

Were the alterations made in the conditions under which loans are now granted to Irish tenant farmers sanctioned by any change in the law?

The alterations were made on the authority of the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will be explain why it was that a, convict named Michael Walsh was removed in a dying condition from Mountjoy Prison to the Mater Miserecordia Hospital, Dublin, about a month since, receiving 15s. out of £3 10s. earned by him while confined, and that he was discharged in prison clothes, which he is still wearing; whether it is usual to give prisoners civil outfit and all their earnings on discharge; and, if so, why was this man differently treated; whether he is aware that this man is anxious to go to his family in America; whether it is usual to give discharged prisoners means to go to their relatives on discharge; and will he order that suitable clothes be supplied to this man at once, and that the balance of his earnings in prison be given to him, and that be will be provided with the passage fare to America when sufficiently recovered to undertake the voyage?

The General Prisons Board inform me that it is not a fact that the convict Walsh was removed to the hospital in a dying condition from Mountjoy Prison. The medical officer of the prison states that on the convict's removal he was quite fit to be removed, though he was suffering from pneumonia. The gratuity payable to him was £3, not £3 10s. as stated in the question, and out of the former amount he received 15s. on his discharge, the custom being to hand to the convicts portion only of their gratuities on their discharge, and to remit them the balance when they have returned home. I think the hon. Member will see that there is some prudence in not paying the full gratuity until the prisoner has returned to his home. The object of this arrangement is to prevent men suffering from reaction on their discharge after long imprisonment frivolously squandering the whole of their gratuities. He was not discharged in prison clothes, but in an outfit of Irish tweed. He did not say to the Governor of the prison that he intended to emigrate. It is the practice to defray the expenses of the convicts to the place of their arrest or conviction, or any other place which they may select which would not involve greater expense. In the present case, Walsh has not applied for his travelling expenses, but as soon as he does so they will be provided in the ordinary way. The Prisons Board have no funds at their disposal to defray the cost of his emigration to America, but I may add, however, that, in addition to the 15s. given to him on his discharge, the Governor handed over to him a sum of £5 private cash, which, though speaking from memory, I am inclined to think was sent him from America.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the number of additional nurses and officials appointed to the lunatic department of the Belfast Workhouse since 1st November last; also the number of deaths in the lunatic department since that date, and the number on which inquests have been held; whether the epileptics are still kept in the lunatic department, and if the Local Government Board has instructed the epileptics to be so kept there; whether, at a recent inquest on an epileptic who died in that department, held in Belfast, the coroner's jury strongly protested against this practice; whether he will state by what authority epileptics are placed there, or lunatics kept tinder restraint in the workhouse; whether he is aware of the practice of exchanging patients carried on between the workhouse authorities and the Governors of the asylum at Belfast; and if some inquiry will be made into the whole system in relief of these helpless afflicted persons?

I regret that I am not in a position to reply to-day to my hon. Friend's question, as I have not yet received from Ireland the Report for which I have called. Perhaps, therefore, the question will he put down for a future day.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the construction of the Ballina and Killala Light Railway, a deviation from the deposited plans has been made—namely, in ending the line and erecting the terminal station at the Killala end, 250 yards short of the point shown on the plans; if so, why the line as constructed has been approved of by the proper authority, and whether that authority will now recall its approval and compel adherence to the deposited plans?

It is provided in the Second Schedule of the Order in Council, paragraph 3, that the company shall construct the—

"railway in accordance with the deposited plans and sections. as modified by the working plans and sections," &c.

The line is constructed in accordance with these latter, which have received the approval of the Board of Works. The change of the station site was made because, in the opinion of the Board, the new site was more convenient for the town, more economical as regards construction, and better facilitated the working of the line.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the general dissatisfaction in Ireland, particularly in Ulster, with reference to the present state of the law relating to town parks; whether his attention has been called to the decision of the Land Commission in the case of Mrs. Letitia M'Cann, tenant, and the Marquess of Downshire, landlord, wherein the village of Dundrum, County Down, Which had a population of only 372 in 1881, was decided to be a (own to which the exemption from the benefits of the Land Acts applied; is he aware that the Land Commission had previously decided that Dundrum was not such a town at the passing of the Act; whether he is aware that the Cowper Commission recommended that the exemption should not apply to any town under a population of 5,000, and that the late Government accepted in the House of Commons, in the Land Act of 1887, an amendment providing that the exemption should not apply where the population was under 2,000; and whether some steps will be taken to preserve to tenants in towns in Ireland their property in such lands held outside the towns? At the same time, I may ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware of the large number of tenants in Ireland whose holdings have been exempted from the benefits of the Land Acts; whether his attention has been called to the ease of Mr. John Robb, of Belfast, tenant, and the Marquess of Downshire, landlord, where the Land Commission decided to fix an extra rent on the improvements made by the tenant, without any contribution from the landlord, on the ground that such improvements were too good for the holding: and whether the terms of Reference to the proposed Committee will be so extended as to include inquiry into the cases now excluded by the defects of the Land Acts, but which are equally entitled to the benefits which these Acts were intended to confer on all the farmers of Ireland?

I am informed that the Judicial Commissioner is at present absent from Dublin hearing fair rent appeals. There has not been sufficient time to communicate with him in the country since the questions were put on the Paper, and. therefore, I hope the hon. Gentleman will postpone them.

I should wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether cases of the class referred to in these questions would not come within the scope of the proposed Committee to inquire into the working of the Land Acts?

I have not considered that question, and I would rather not answer off-hand.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a strong feeling exists among the Governors of the Belfast Asylum in favour of having the asylums of Belfast and County Antrim managed under one Board of Governors, as suggested before the Committee of this House on the Belfast Asylum Bill: and whether, considering the advantages to the patients likely to arise from this course, the Local Govern- ment Board will take into consideration the advisability of carrying it out?

I am informed that at a recent meeting of the Board of Governors of the Belfast Asylum a proposal to consider a scheme for the management, under the joint control of the Town Council and the Grand Jury, of the present city asylum and the new county asylum for Antrim was negatived by 10 votes to 7. Under the provisions of the Belfast Asylums Act (1892), which constitute the city and county separate asylum districts and requires the appointment of separate Boards of Governors, it would not be competent for the Board of Control to sanction the re-amalgation of the two districts; but the Inspectors of Lunatic Asylums, I may observe, are of opinion, so far as their judgment goes, that the amalgamation of the two districts would not be advantageous.

I wish to ask the Chief Secretary a question of which I have given him private notice. Is he aware that eviction proceedings were commenced yesterday against the entire population on a portion of Lord Dillon's estate in County Roscommon; that although many of the tenants were not in arrears of rent, yet several families were evicted; that three of these families have been refused re-admission even as caretakers; were the police present at the evictions; were the forces of the Crown used for the purpose of protecting emergencymen engaged in throwing down houses; and will the right hon. Gentleman, in order to prevent further proceedings of this kind, endeavour to have the Second Reading of the Evicted Tenants Bill taken before Whitsuntide?

I am not in a position to give; an answer in detail as to the transactions that took place yesterday. I am aware generally that these proceedings were announced, and that police protection was required, and was granted, as the law obliges us to do. The particulars about so many families having been evicted, and so forth, I cannot answer, as there has not been time for me yet to receive any details. The police, I presume, were present at the evictions. The forces of the Crown have not been used to protect emergencymen in throwing down houses in other cases, nor will they in this. I cannot say whether we shall have the Second Reading of the Evicted Tenants Bill taken before Whitsuntide, but, of course, I shall do the best I can to press the measure forward.