moved, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. He said, he hoped that some information would be given to the House by the replies of the Board of Trade with regard to the measure, and particularly whether it authorised the charging of the prohibitive rates on this railway which were charged on other railways. The Bill appeared to be a very innocent one in the guise in which it was presented to the House. Of course, if it were only a Bill affecting the Easingwold Railway, he did not suppose that he would have found occasion for interference, but as a matter of fact he found that the words "et cetera" indicated that the Bill applied to quite a number of railways in England, and Scotland, and Ireland. The House would remember that the Railway Rates and Charges Bill came into operation in 1893. Some of the charges were opposed by various Members of the House in 1892; but Parliament voted the revised rates in ignorance of what their effect would be, and there was a general increase of rates all through the country, to the very serious damage of the traders and agriculturists. Ever since that time efforts had been made with the intention of reducing the rates, and at length a Bill had been introduced into Parliament as the result of very much agitation which would prevent the continuance of such charges by railway monopolies as were injurious to trade. That Bill was now before the House. It proposed to do something for the relief of the classes to which he had referred. He did not know whether it would come to anything, or if it would he useful in any case. However, the Bill was intended to do good to the traders and agriculturists, and he must say that he was very much astonished that, at the moment it was before the House, the Board of Trade permitted another Bill to be brought forward which would confer upon half a dozen Railway Companies the very powers of making maximum charges to which so much objection was taken. He knew they would be told by the Board of Trade that the Companies had power to make these charges under the Act of 1891–92, but it appeared to him that in common decency they ought to ask that the particular Companies affected by this Bill should at least wait until they saw what was likely to become of the Public Bill promoted in that House. Surely no serious difficulty could arise from a delay of that kind. He was not going to labour this question. Probably the majority of hon. Members of that House had been asked by their constituents to do something with regard to this matter; and promises having been made that the traders and the agriculturalists should be relieved, he contended that the Government ought not to grant the Railway Companies any powers in excess of those which they possessed at present. They had a right to protest against the action of these monopolist railways; and in the interests of the public, and especially having regard to the fact that the Bill dealing with the public interests in the matter was to be brought before the House, he hoped that the House would reject the Motion.

seconded the Motion.

said, that notices had been issued to the traders affected inquiring whether they had any objections to this Bill, and no such objec- tions had been received. He appreciated the efforts of his hon. Friend (Mr. Morton) in the protection of the interests of the traders and of the community at large, but he would point out to him, and assure him of the fact, that this Bill would reduce and not increase the powers of the Railway Companies in respect of their charges. He had no doubt that the opposition of his hon. Friend to the Bill would win the gratitude of the Railway Companies.

said, the railways affected by this Bill were very small ones, and it would be extremely inconvenient and objectionable if these lines, which formed part of the large systems, were treated differently to the general system of railways. The reason why no traders had objected to this Bill was that the measure was one that was advantageous to them.

said, the Easingwold Railway was owned and kept up by the landlords and agriculturists of the district, and the North Eastern Company afforded them every facility, but the tolls and charges were in the hands of the proprietors of the district. The railway was a very useful one that ought to be encouraged in every possible manner.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that under the late Government the Local Government Board in Ireland frequently overruled the decisions of Nationalist Boards of Guardians, even when those decisions were within the law; and whether he will direct the Local Government Board now to adopt the same course in dealing with the decision of the Edenderry Board of Guardians in the case of the labourer Macnamara?

The Local Government Board inform me that it is not clear to them to what cases the hon. Gentleman refers in the first paragraph of the question. Regarding the action of the Edenderry Board of Guardians in the case of Macnamara, I pointed out, in replying to a previous question on this subject on the 10th instant, that the course adopted by the Guardians was contrary to the spirit and intention of the Labourers' Act, and that the Local Government Board would so acquaint the Guardians. The Board, however, have no controlling power in connection with the selection of tenants for cottages under these Acts. I understand that at a meeting of the Guardians to be held to-morrow the Guardians will reconsider their determination to give the cottage in this particular case to the labourer who is at present in occupation.

inquired if the Local Government Board in Ireland had any rule which enabled them to distinguish in their treatment between Nationalist and other Boards of Guardians?

replied in the negative.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, under "The Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893," every buyer of any parcel of fertilisers or feeding stuffs is entitled to have the parcel sampled and analysed under the provisions of that Act, and that quite irrespective of whether he be a farmer, a dealer, or a manufacturer, and at the rate of fees fixed under the Act by the public Local Authority?

I have no authority to decide any questions which may arise as to the interpretation of the Act in question; but I have no objection to say that I am advised that every bona fide buyer of a fertiliser or feeding stuff within the meaning of the Act is entitled, on payment of the fee sanctioned by the Local Authority, to have an analysis of the article under Section 5 of the Act, irrespective of any question of whether he be a farmer, manufacturer, or dealer.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the attention of his Department has been directed to the serious dangers to which the public are exposed from the public sale and use of burning oils of low flash point, sanctioned by the legal flash limit of 73° Fah., especially in view of the experience of temperature during last summer, during which the shade temperature record shows (between April and September) 60 days on which 73° Fah. and upwards was registered, 20 days on which temperature was from 80 to 90° Fah., and three days when it was from 90 to 103° Fah., in London?

said: The question of the flash point of mineral oil is, as I have said before on more than one occasion, an extremely disputable one; and, while representations have been made on the one side in favour of raising the flash point, other authorities are strongly opposed to any alteration to the same, this flash point having been adopted, after very careful experimental inquiry, as the equivalent in the closed test of the former flash point in the open test. The matter is one which would, no doubt, occupy the attention of any Committee of Inquiry which may hereafter be appointed on the subject of petroleum legislation.

When does the right hon. Gentleman propose to appoint the Committee on the Petroleum Acts which he promised us some time ago?

I should be glad to appoint the Committee, but there has been some little difficulty in securing Members to serve on it and in deciding on the terms of Reference. The matter is, however, still having my careful consideration, and there shall be no avoidable delay.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Government will bring in a Bill for the purpose of removing any doubts as to whether commoners, who, in right of their holdings, turn cattle and sheep on the common lands of a parish, come under the Ground Game Act of 1881, and so enable the commoners to protect themselves from the damage done by the rabbits which eat or pollute the grass growing thereon to the prejudice of their flocks and herds, and from any interference by the lord of the manor or his keepers?

There are no "doubts" on the question. The Ground Game Act, 1880, expressly provides that—

"A person shall not be deemed an occupier of land for the purposes of this Act by reason of his having a right of common over such lands."

The Home Office has not heard of any cases of injury such as described by my hon. Friend's question. It is not a matter in which the Government propose legislation.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the plans of the Havock, which were stolen from Messrs. Yarrow and Co., have found their way into the Naval Intelligence Department of the United States?

The Admiralty have no information on this subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the transport service of the Royal Marines is so weak that a battalion of Marines, recently despatched from Portsmouth to Aldershot, had to requisition the Army Service Corps for horses and waggons, and even men; and whether, as in the event of war the Royal Marines are usually called on to furnish at least one battalion, he will take steps to provide an efficient transport service for that force?

The object for which the Royal Marines are maintained is service afloat. It is not considered desirable, therefore, to provide them with regimental transport similar to that of regiments of the Line. I am, however, informed that such a regiment, in marching from Portsmouth to Aldershot, would have to requisition transport in the same way as is necessary in the case of a battalion of Marines.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, as it has been the custom for officers proceeding from India or returning to their duties to occasionally be granted (when there was room) transport accommodation on one of Her Majesty's troopships, and as that service is about to be abolished, the Government, in making contracts for the transmission of troops to and from India by private firms, will take into their consideration the advisa- bility of making arrangements by which officers shall not (when space permits) be deprived of the privilege of obtaining passages on the ships to convey the troops which they have hitherto enjoyed?

Indulgence passages will be granted when there is room in the transports taken up for the Indian Trooping Service of 1894-5 on the same conditions as in the past.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty has his attention been called to a Memorial presented to the First Lord of the Admiralty by the Londonderry Chamber of Commerce praying for the establishment of a training ship in Lough Foyle, and pointing out the exceptional advantages likely to accrue from compliance with the prayer of the Memorial; and does he propose to take any steps in relation to the matter?

The Memorial was received by the First Lord, and an answer was sent that the matter would receive the attention of the Admiralty in the event of an increase in the number of training ships being ever contemplated.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in the event of a training ship being sent to Ireland, he does not consider Queenstown has stronger claims than any other part of Ireland?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware there is much more material for Admiralty purposes in Donegal and Londonderry than in any other part of Ireland?

These are hypothetical questions which I cannot answer. If an additional training ship were added, the claims put forward would be carefully considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the language of Mr. John M'Inerney, chairman of a meeting organised for the purpose of condemning Mr. Thomas Donnellan, calling on the people to boycott Mr. Donnellan, reported in The Limerick Leader, 7th May, and to a resolution passed to the same effect; and whether the Government propose to take any steps in the matter?

My attention has been drawn to a newspaper report of the proceedings at the meeting referred to. It was originally contemplated to hold the meeting beside the farm now occupied by Mr. Dounellan; but the promoters having been informed that no meeting would be allowed there, it was held at a distance of two miles away in another county. There is no legal evidence of the speeches made at the meeting, and, apart from this, I am informed that there was no local sympathy whatever with the promoters of the meeting, and that it is not anticipated it will have any injurious effect upon Mr. Dounellan, who still retains the farm.

Was the meeting lawful or unlawful?

If it had been held at the place originally chosen it would have been unlawful; but it was not held there. I may add that, in the opinion of those who are responsible for order in Ireland, much more harm than good is done to the persons concerned by calling attention to these cases, though, of course, when harm has been done, I perfectly agree that every Member of the House would be within his right to call attention to it. The proposition I submit is that, where no harm is done to anyone, it is better to leave the matter alone.

Can the right hon. Gentleman cite any instance in which injury has been inflicted by questions of this nature?

I cannot, but I have an opinion which is confirmed by experience and rational expectation alike.

asked how the question of locality affected the legality of a meeting?

I should think that the argument is pretty clear. If it was held in a certain place it might probably lead to violence, and would be illegal, whereas if held at a considerable distance there is less danger. In reply to a further observation by Mr. Ross

said, he should prefer to act on the advice of his legal advisers than upon that of the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether the Government expects to introduce any legislation dealing with the question of secondary education in Scot-laud during the present Session; and whether, failing such, he will move that an Address be addressed to Her Gracious Majesty to appoint a Royal Commission on Secondary Education in Scotland?

The County Committees appointed last year have already done much work, and are gaining additional experience by the operation of their schemes. I do not think it would be well at present to do anything to interfere with the work upon which they are engaged.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the result of the experiments made at Aldershot and elsewhere since the 4th of September, 1893, with the view of ascertaining how many 303 cordite powder cartridges with nickel-covered bullets can be fired from the Maxim gun before the barrel becomes unfit for accurate shooting?

No experiments have been made with the barrels of the Service Maxim gun, but at recent experiments at Hythe two experimental barrels fired 10,000 rounds each of cordite ammunition with nickel-covered bullets. At the termination of the trial the accuracy was as good as when the barrels were new, and each barrel was reported to be fit to fire several thousand rounds more.

The Report issued last year stated that experiments were being carried out at Aldershot. Were they carried out?

No, Sir; my information is that no such experiments have been made with the barrel of the Service gun. Only experimental barrels were used.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether Returning Officers in Scotland are entitled to charge 1s. per mile for travelling expenses of Presiding Officers in cases where these officers travel by rail at a cost of 3d. per mile first-class fare?

By the Returning Officers (Scotland) Act, 1891, Section 3 and Schedule, a Returning Officer may make a maximum charge of Is. per mile for travelling expenses of Presiding Officers within the Sheriffdom, but it is provided that the charges are in no case to exceed the sums actually paid or payable. When 3d. per mile only, therefore, has been paid, it would seem illegal to allow any farther charge.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if his attention has been called to the report of a meeting of the Lesmahagow School Board, held in the Jubilee Hall, Lesma-hagow, on the 3rd instant, at which the Chairman is reported to have said that for the present year £123 13s. 1d. had been paid for the providing of books to save the reduction of the grant; if he is aware that it is currently denied that any scholars receive books free of charge at that school; and if he will say who received the books to the value stated?

The circumstances to which the hon. Member refers have not been brought before the Department, and I have no means of knowing the special application of the amount named as spent upon books. There are 11 schools under the management of the Lesmabagow School Board, and it is not stated to which of the schools the question refers. Perhaps my hon. Friend will provide me with particulars.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state the cause of the continuous delay in giving effect to the decision of Her Majesty's Government granting a gold standard of currency to the Colony of British Honduras; and, having regard to the fact that the trade of the colony is represented as being paralysed and the public finances in a deplorable state through the want of a stable currency, whether the necessary arrangements will now be pushed forward so as to bring the gold standard into operation at the earliest possible date?

The measures required for effecting a complete change of the currency of a colony involve many important questions which can only be decided after careful and deliberate consideration necessarily entailing delay. The Secretary of State is aware of the anxiety of the colonists of British Honduras for the introduction of the gold standard, and he will do all in his power to expedite the matter.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware that the assistant mistress of the Horwich National School recently received notice from the head mistress that she must immediately leave her lodgings or lose her situation, because upon her own admission she was lodging with a Unitarian, the head mistress stating that she was or would be supported by the vicar in the matter; and whether the Department will take action to reverse this requirement and to prevent its recurrence?

The Department have no information as to the alleged occurrence. The responsibility with regard to appointment and dismissal of teachers rests, of course, with the managers of a school and not with the head teacher. If the managers of a school act in the manner described, the Department have at present no power to interfere. I am considering the question of bringing in a Bill at the first favourable opportunity, with the view of giving a reasonable degree of security of tenure to teachers, but I am not sure whether it would cover a case of this sort.

J. beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that the salaries received by the Second Class of the old staff of the Registry of Deeds (Ireland) are, owing to the classification in force at the time of their appointment, less, service for service, than those enjoyed by members of any other equally important Department under the control of the Treasury, some improvement, personal to its existing members, might be made in the position of the Second Class, without permanently or materially increasing the Departmental Estimate?

The duties of these clerks are duties proper to the Second Division, and will hereafter be performed by clerks of that Division. The scale of the Second Class is better than that of the Second Division, and, service for service, their salaries are higher. I cannot, therefore, admit the assumption on which this question rests, nor can I undertake to improve the position of existing members of the Second Class.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the building operations on the Curragh Camp are to be still further delayed; whether, in view of the want of employment in the locality, he would insist on the progress of the works, as previously promised by his Department; and whether the War Office intend to use Killaloe slates in Irish buildings?

Preparations for a further contract for works at the Curragh arc being made; but as the contract will be a very large one, the necessary plans and other documents will not be completed for some time to come. As regards the use of Killaloe slates, I have nothing to add to my answer to the hon. Member for North Tipperary on the 26th ultimo.

When is it probable that the work will be commenced?

I cannot say; the specifications are now being prepared.

Will the right hon. Gentleman press the work on?

I will do all I can.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any Code of Regulations for carrying into effect the compulsory clauses of the Education Act of 1892 in the City of Dublin has been approved of by the Commissioners of National Education, or whether any such Code has yet been submitted by the Corporation of Dublin to the Commissioners of National Education, or by the Commissioners to the Corporation; and, if so, when?

I called for a Report on this question yesterday, but have not yet received it, and must ask the hon. Gentleman, therefore, to defer the question until Monday next.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can insert a clause in the Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Bill to meet such cases as that of John Mackey, of Penrath, Waterford, as otherwise it might possibly be held by the arbitrators that it was not an eviction within the ordinary acceptation of the term "evicted tenant," inasmuch as it was a question of disputed title and not for non-payment of rent the eviction was effected?

I think the proper answer to this question is that it is impossible to consider detailed cases merely referred to by the name of the person, and then to ask me whether I consider such cases come within the purview of the Bill, and if they do not, whether I will alter the Bill so as to bring them within it. I do not think I can undertake to deal with the Bill in that spirit or from that point of view.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General why, when the new establishment of surveyor's stationary clerks was created in August last, and three classes of stationary clerks appointed for England and Wales —namely, head stationary clerks, assistant head stationary clerks, and stationary clerks, no assistant head stationary clerks were appointed for either Scotland or Ireland; and whether he will take steps to place all these clerks, both in England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, on a footing of equality?

In Scotland and Ireland the amount of work devolving on the surveyor's stationary offices is much less than it is in England and Wales, and the stationary staff is correspondingly less. It is not considered necessary that in either Scotland or Ireland there should be, as in England and Wales, an assistant head stationary clerk.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the work necessary to prevent the pollution of the public bathing place at Mount Wise, Devonport, is not yet in hand; and whether he can state when it will be commenced, and also the length of time required for its completion?

The contract for this work has been accepted, and orders have been given for its immediate commencement. It is hoped that the service will be completed within six weeks.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what has been the result of the promised inquiry into the charges made against Dr. Pentland respecting the conduct of his duties as dispensary medical officer at Dromod, Leitrim?

The Local Government Board inform me that their Medical Inspector visited Dromod on the 9th instant, and after careful inquiry satisfied himself that Dr. Pentland has a residence there which he has regularly occupied since June, 1893, and that such residence is within the dispensary district for which he acts as medical officer. The cases to which my attention was drawn on the 1st instant have been inquired into, and it has been found that no inconvenience was caused to the patient in either case, and that no blame attaches to the medical officer who was temporarily absent from home when called. In the case of John Farrell he is stated to have been a paying patient, and had no dispensary ticket.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the additional subject—

"The services rendered by retail shopkeepers, merchants, manufacturers, and other persons engaged in distribution and protection,"

which has been introduced into the newly issued English Code for Evening Continuation Schools, page 17, to meet objections raised by traders as to the exclusive reference to the work of Co-operative Societies in the Code of last year; and whether he will meet the same objections raised by Scottish traders, on similar grounds, to the new Scotch Code, by inserting in it the same addition?

The Evening School Code for Scotland does not now include the detailed schemes which were published last year as specimens. School managers may submit their own schemes, and it is open to them to include the additional subjects referred to in the hon. Member's question; and the Department will be ready to sanction it.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the steamship Cordelia, owned by Messrs. Kilner and Sons, of Portmadoe, has recently arrived in the Thames from Hamburg, and is now discharging into barges at Kings Stairs, Rotherhithe, several tons of bottles made by Lewn and Newmann of Hamburg, consigned to R. White, London; and that these bottles have no name or mark upon them indicating their foreign origin; and what steps do the Government propose taking to put a stop to this breach of the law?

said: The Board of Trade are informed by the Commissioners of Customs that the bottles imported in the Cordelia did not bear marks coming within the operation of the Merchandise Marks Act. There has, therefore, been no breach of the law.

I ought to have mentioned in the question that the name "R. White" is stamped on the bottles in addition to the words "one farthing deposit charged."

said, that he understood it would only be illegal to represent that the articles had been manufactured in England. If the hon. Member desired further information he could put another question on a future day.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire into the importation of these foreign bottles and the subsequent stamping of English words on them, conveying by implication that the bottles have been manufactured in England?

That point is being inquired into.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, if the whole of any sum voted by this House is not expended upon the particular object for which it was voted, there is any way in which the expenditure of the balance can be traced; and, if so, whether such a balance accrued in respect of money voted for works at Sheerness in 1892–3; and what has become of that balance?

The method of dealing with a balance of the kind referred to can be seen by study of the Appropriation Account for the year, always provided that the item is sufficiently important to be separately mentioned. The £3,000 voted for Sheerness under Sub-head 1 of Vote 10,' Part 1 of Navy Estimates, 1892–93, appears as a postponed item on pages 86, 87, of the Navy Appropriation Account, 1892–93. It formed part of £58,497 gross saving on works authorised by Vote in 1892–93. Of this £58,497 a sum of £17,813 was, with Treasury approval, expended on other urgent works unprovided for in Estimates. The balance, £40,684, was part of the total sum surrendered to the Exchequer at the end of the year.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can now definitely fix a day on which the Second Reading of the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill will be taken?

said: The Board of Trade are extremely anxious to make progress as rapidly as possible with the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill, but I understand from my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House that the precise date for the Second Reading cannot be named.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are thousands of accounts between traders and Railway Companies outstanding pending the settlement of this question?

Yes.

I will repeat the question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Tuesday next.

Seeing that the Government are extending these objectionable powers—as evidenced by their action on a Private Bill to-day—is there any reason for proceeding with this Bill?

I do not think I should answer a question which merely involves an expression of opinion.

Did not the hon. Gentleman to-day support a Bill increasing the rates?

Order, order !

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, with regard to the agreement with King Leopold, whether the strip leased to us between Tanganyika and the Albert Edward Nyanza has been explored; and whether the character and disposition of the tribes inhabiting or claiming it are known?

The country has not been explored, but the object of this part of the Agreement was to reserve a right to a route and means of communication whenever it should be desirable to make use of them.

On behalf of the hon. Member for West Dorset, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, seeing that the map accompanying Mr. Hunter Pringle's Report to the Royal Commis- sion on Agriculture is drawn from the Ordnance Survey maps, he will give instructions that the acreage of the area marked on that map in black may be ascertained; and whether he will endeavour to ascertain the extent of land, in addition to that marked in black, that has been thrown on the landlords' hands since 1879?

The acreage of the area marked in black on the map to which the hon. Member refers is 28,222 acres and 28 poles, as will be seen by reference to the note on the subject at the foot of the map. I should be very glad if the information suggested in the second paragraph of the question were available, but I am very doubtful whether it would be possible to obtain it with any accuracy. The matter is one, however, which would naturally be considered by the Royal Commission, with whom, if necessary, I should be very happy to cooperate, in the event of its being found practicable to institute an inquiry.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, I beg to ask the Postmaster General what steps, if any, have been taken in placing the contracts with the various Shipping Companies for the carriage of Her Majesty's mails to force the Fair Contract Clause, passed by the House of Commons, relating to Government contracts; and if he can state the names of the Companies with whom such contracts have been entered into, and the names of the vessels, also the rate of wages paid to sailors and firemen employed on board thereof?

The Resolution referred to has not been considered, and I do not think can fairly be taken to apply to contracts in connection with the conveyance of mails with Steamship Companies, which, like Railway Companies, are primarily engaged in other large commercial operations. It is customary, however, to debar Mail Steamship Companies from sub-letting, and to stipulate that the ships should be properly equipped, manned, and officered. A Return of contracts with Shipping Companies is published every year in the Postmaster General's Annual Report.

Then are we to understand that Ship- ping Companies are exempt from the operation of the Fair Contract Clause?

Yes.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether the £2 charged to each person to whom the privilege of keys to Windsor Forest are granted is paid into the Exchequer; to what sum the total amounts; and by whom this charge has been sanctioned?

said: The granting of keys to the gates in the Windsor Great Park, and adjoining woods, rests with His Royal Highness the Ranger. If the privilege of a key is granted, a charge is made of £1 1s. per annum therefor. This charge was first made in 1888, and has the approval of the Commissioners of Woods and the Treasury. The total sum received in 1892–93 amounted to £383 3s., which is included as part of the income of the Land Revenues accounted for by the Commissioners of Woods in the Accounts rendered with their Report to Parliament for that year.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that leave has been refused by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to the Officers of the Horse Guards to play polo on about six acres of Windsor Park, which a few years since was put in good condition for the game at the expense of the entire regiment; and, in view of the great pleasure which the sight of this game gives to many inhabitants of the locality, and its healthful character, he will use his influence with the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to allow it to be played on these six acres?

I am sorry that I am unable to relieve my hon. Friend's anxiety on this point, as the War Department has nothing whatever to do with it. Perhaps he will try how he may succeed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Perhaps the Secretary to the Treasury can reply?

The giving or withholding of leave to play polo in the Windsor Great Park is a matter which rests with the Ranger, and not with the Commissioners of Woods. It is understood that, prior to 1889, polo was always played on a site known as the cavalry exercising ground; but in that year, in consequence of the Royal Agricultural Show being held on that ground, special permission was given to use another site known as the review ground. There is no desire to prohibit polo playing, but the cavalry exercising ground having been now restored, players are, it is believed, requested now to revert to the original ground, and in this request the Commissioner of Woods, who has been consulted, concurs.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the decision of two of Her Majesty's Judges that lions kept in cages, not being domestic animals, are not protected against cruel treatment under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and whether, that being the law, it is in the power of anyone, for gain or otherwise, to inflict whatever torture they please upon such animals without liability to prosecution or punishment; and whether he proposes to introduce a Bill to amend the Act?

The effeet of the decision appears to be in substance as stated in the question. The subject seems to be a very proper one for further legislation, but I cannot hope to deal with it this Session.

Is it not a fact that any person for monetary or other reasons may inflict any amount of torture on animals which are not domestic, and need further legislation go beyond the omission of the word "domestic" in the Cruelty to Animals Act?

I cannot, without further consideration, give an opinion as to the amount of legislation that would be necessary to carry out the views of the hon. Member. Any legislation, however, will occupy time.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he will allow the map attached to the Report on Essex Agriculture, showing the extent of land derelict and out of tillage in that county, to be exhibited in the Tea Room of the House, for the information of hon. Members?

There is no positive objection; but as the map in question has been circulated to all hon. Members, and is readily accessible in the Library, I do not think it necessary to exhibit it in the Tea Room.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that John Ingram, whilst digging a grave in Putney Cemetery on Tuesday, the 22nd instant, was shot in the back by one of a squad of Volunteers practising at the Wimbledon rifle range, and died from the effects yesterday; and whether, in view of the great danger to the lives of people using the common or living in the neighbourhood, he will bring the matter under the notice of His Royal Highness the Ranger, with a view to the prohibition of any further firing in so dangerous a locality?

The hon. Member is evidently not aware that Wimbledon Common is not Crown property, and that the Duke of Cambridge is, therefore, not the Ranger of it, nor does such an office, so far as I know, exist. The common is, I believe, the property of the ratepayers of a district within a certain area of it, under an Act of Parliament passed in 1871. In the same Act the rights of certain Volunteer corps who had ranges on it were preserved to them.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if he is now in a position to state what were the circumstances connected with the recent outbreak of pleuro-pneumonia in the Isle of Thanet; and to what sources of infection the Veterinary Department of the Board attribute the contraction of the disease?

The outbreak in question occurred at a farm near Minster, in the Isle of Thanet. The usual measures were immediately taken to trace and slaughter the animals which had been exposed to infection, and upwards of 120 animals have thus been dealt with, of which seven have been found to be diseased. The inquiries are still proceeding, but as yet we have no reason to suppose that any of the animals which have been in contact with the disease have been removed out of the district. No further information has been elicited as to the origin of the outbreak, and I think there is not much room for doubt that the outbreak is due to the introduction of animals from the neighbourhood of London.

Am I right in saying the right hon. Gentleman told us there had been no outbreak for some months previously?

I believe the right hon. Gentleman is correct, but I have not the dates before me.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman had seen the report of a second outbreak in the Isle of Thanet?

I have seen no such report.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture, in reference to his statement, on 1st May instant, that cases had occurred of diseased cattle being imported from Canada under the administration of the Board of Agriculture in the late Government, if he can say what those cases were and when they occurred? At the same time, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the special examination of the lungs of Canadian cattle, which he announced on the 24th of April, has commenced?

The cases to which I referred in my answer of the 1st instant were those of five animals stated to have been imported from Montreal by the City of Lincoln in September, 1890. The right hon. Gentleman will find certain particulars of these cases on pages 96 and 97 of the Report of the Veterinary Department for 1890, the outbreaks being numbered 35, 53, 60, 68, and 69 respectively. The special examination of the lungs of Canadian cattle commenced on the 17th instant.

asked whether it was not a fact that there was no evidence whatever in these cases that the animals came from Canada?

My information is entirely opposed to that statement. The Papers distinctly point out that the animals came from Canada.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will grant the Return, standing on the Paper this day, relating to the revenues of the Church in Wales?

I find that no modern information is available as to the ownership of impropriate tithe rent-charge, and that the collection of such information would be a very long and difficult task. I must point out that the proper allocation of ecclesiastical revenue, after the passing of the Bill for the disestablishment of the Church in Wales, could not be shown in the form of a Return at the present time, the settlement of such allocation being one of the functions of the Commissioners to be appointed under the Bill. In these circumstances, I cannot grant the Return for which the hon. Member asks. I have, however, ascertained that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners will be able, "within a reasonable period, to furnish a Return, by parishes and counties, of the property of the Church in Wales in glebe, in tithe rent-charge, and from other sources; and if my hon. Friend will put on the Paper a Motion for a Return in that form, I shall be happy to assent to it, and it will be prepared with as little delay as possible.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Colonial Office have considered the possibility of an early Dissolution of the Newfoundland House of Assembly being asked for; and whether the Government will consider the advisability or recommending the Governor General of the Colony to refuse to consent to a Dissolution, at least until after all the Election Petitions have been dealt with by the Law Courts.

The late Government in Newfoundland resigned because the Governor refused to grant them a Dissolution, but I cannot answer a hypothetical question.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he has yet decided whether it is necessary that the writ of dedimus poteslatem heretofore accustomed to be taken out by Magistrates on their appointment to the County Bench in Lancashire should continue to be so taken out, or whether it may be discontinued and the cost of each appointment thereby reduced? The hon. Member, in putting the question, stated that by a printer's error the word "potestatem" had not inappropriately been printed "poteslatem."

I have come to the conclusion that there is no sufficient reason why the practice of taking out the writ of dedimus potestatem by County Magistrates upon their appointment should continue in Lancashire. The discontinuance of the practice will, no doubt, have the effect of reducing the expense to the persons appointed to be Justices. The question what is the proper fee to be fixed as payable upon appointment is now under my consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the system now coming into force of allowing candidates for the entrance examinations for Woolwich and Sandhurst to choose their own place of written examination from about 20 different centres in the United Kingdom can also be extended to the viva voce and medical examinations; if this extension cannot be made, whether he will state the reason for thus limiting the advantages of the proposed change; and whether he is aware that the above limitation practically prevents the proposed change from conferring any pecuniary advantage or benefit on candidates and their parents?

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave as to viva voce examinations on the 30th of April last. As regards the medical examinations, which, I may observe, only the successful candidates have to attend, the experiment of holding them at the headquarters of the district has proved far from satisfactory, and 70 per cent. of the candidates prefer London as the place of examination.

What was the substance of the answer of April 30?

It was to the effect that there must be uniformity of result in these examinations.

Does the limitation have the effect suggested in the last paragraph of my question?

I do not think it does.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he has taken with reference to the grievances of the London cabmen, which were brought before him by a deputation last autumn and by various questions put in this House and privately since then; and whether, taking into consideration the public inconvenience caused by strikes, he is willing to appoint a Committee of this House to consider the relations of the industry to the Home Office, and to recommend such changes as may be necessary as to transferring the control to the London County Council, the limitation of drivers' licences, the amount and disposal of the cab plate revenue, the jurisdiction of the police courts, the relations with the Railway Companies, tariff, payments to owners, stands and shelters in the streets, regulations, and all other matters touching the conduct of the Metropolitan cab service?

The matter has engaged my attention, and I have had drawn, and hope to be able to introduce, a Bill which will remedy some of the evils connected with what is called "bilking" brought under my notice at the deputation referred to. All the Railway Companies have been communicated with on the subject of the complaints relating to the practice of the different companies made by the deputation. I am not, as at present advised, prepared to recommend the appointment of a Committee to consider the somewhat multifarious subjects referred to by my hon. Friend.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman thinks it advisable to limit the number of licences granted for drivers and cabs, as it is practically apparent to everybody that there are too many cabs at the present time?

I think that is a suggestion well worthy of consideration. My own opinion is that there are too many cabs.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the sentence of 10 years penal servitude passed upon the Italian Anarchist, Polti, at the Central Criminal Court on the 4th instant; and whether, looking to the similarity of Polti's offence to that for which John Daly was condemned to penal servitude for life, and having regard to the fact that John Daly has now been over 10 years in prison, he will reconsider Daly's case with a view to his release?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask whether it is not a fact that, so far from Daly's offence being similar to that of Polti and his confederates, the latter were avowed Anarchists who did not disguise their intention to use explosives, while Daly, who was convicted of treason-felony, entirely repudiated any connection with dynamite offences, and alleged that the bombs found in his possession were planted on him. by the police, a statement borne out by the Chief Constable of Birmingham; and whether that fact is not an additional reason why Daly, who has already been in prison 10 years, should be released?

I can only repeat what I have said on previous occasions— that the offence of which Daly was properly convicted was at least equal in gravity to that of the other persons referred to. Comparisons of this kind between criminal cases are apt to be misleading. The hon. Member selects for comparison with Daly's case the case of Polti, whose sentence was for 10 years, and passes over that of Polti's accomplice, Ferrara, whose sentence was for 20 years. These persons were convicted of offences committed under widely different circumstances, and both were sentenced by the same Judge, one of the most experienced criminal lawyers on the English Bench. Daly's case has been repeatedly under my consideration, and I regret that I cannot consistently with my public duty add anything to my previous statements on the subject.

asked whether the Englishmen convicted at Walsall of conspiracy got sentences ranges from 5 to 10 years, and whether the right hon. Gentleman would take that fact into account in considering Daly's case?

I am very familiar with that ease.

Is it in the interest of good government that English dynamitards and Italian anarchists should get 10 years, while Irishmen like Daly should be sent to prison for the whole term of their natural life?

That is a very argumentative question, which could not possibly be answered without careful analysis of the facts of widely different cases. I cannot enter into that in answer to a question. I have only to repeat what I have said on previous occasions— that, in my opinion, the time has not come at which it would be proper for the Government to advise any interference with Daly's sentence.

Was John Daly not convicted of treason-felony?

He was convicted of treason-felony.

Is that not a reason why his case should be carefully considered by the Government with a view to his release?

I wish to ask another question, and I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for troubling him.

I do not apologise for troubling him.

Is it not a fact that every Irishman, except one, who was convicted in England of conspiracy or treason-felony within the last 10 years was sentenced to penal servitude for life?

No; that is not the case. Several of them got shorter sentences.

Is it not a fact that before the last General Election the Irish people were led to understand' that amnesty was to be extended to Daly and the other prisoners?

I charge the Government with breach of faith in this matter. It is an outrage.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he would explain why the contract for Navy boots has been removed from Stafford; and whether the Admiralty is aware that in the district where the contract is now placed no Trades Union exists to protect the employes; that the work is made and finished in the homes of the workmen; that there is no restriction as to the number of hours worked by men and boys; and that the wages are 3½d. per pair less than the wages which were paid in Stafford?

No contract for Navy boots has been removed from Stafford; but when recently tenders were invited for new contracts, the Stafford tender was the highest, and was, therefore, unsuccessful. The contracts, which contain the usual clause requiring the payment of the current wages of the district, were placed in several widely scattered districts of Great Britain, in some of which Trades Unions exist, though not in all. All the work is done in factories, except in Northamptonshire, where a small part of it is done in the workpeople's homes (free from restrictions as to hours, &c). This is in accordance with old local customs, which are dying out in consequence of the introduction of machinery. I am informed that as regards part of the Northamptonshire contracts—namely, at Raunds, the wages are 3½d. per pair less than at Stafford. Communications from the Trades Union and Trades Council of Stafford on this subject are now under consideration at the Admiralty.

In consequence of the indefinite answer given to me to-day, and failing a satisfactory assurance from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on Tuesday next I shall move the adjournment in order to bring the serious position of the railway rates question before the House.