I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the war between Honduras and Nicaragua is now over, and the condition of affairs suitable for Her Majesty's Minister in Guatemala to present his credentials to those Republics as well as Costa Rica, and personally to do what he can to further British trade?

Her Majesty's Minister left Guatemala on the 13th of April for Managua, the Capital of Nicaragua. He will visit the other Central American Republics and present his credentials. He will naturally do what he properly can to further British commercial interests. Hostilities between Honduras and Nicaragua have now ceased.

In the absence of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will direct a Return to be made of the number and dates of the epidemics of ophthalmia, scarlet fever, measles, throat complaints, and other infectious maladies, which have broken out during the last 10 years in the pauper district schools-belonging to the Metropolitan Unions, specifying in the case of each epidemic the number of children attacked, the duration of the treatment of cases, the number of deaths and of permanent physical disablement, and the total extra cost occasioned to the ratepayers of the Metropolis by the outbreak?

I have made inquiry, and find that it would not be practicable to furnish such a Return as is suggested. If the right hon. Gentleman would desire a Return as to the mortality amongst children in these schools during a limited period, say of three years, I would be prepared to consent to it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will lay before the House a full Report of the Consul of Zanzibar as to the events which intervened between the departure of Sir Gerald Portal from Uganda and the declaration of war against Kaba Rega; as to the incursions made by Kaba Rega into Uganda territory subsequent to Sir Gerald Portal's departure; and as to the number of Waganda held in slavery by Kaba Rega?

Colonel Colvile stated that Kaba Rega held 20,000 subjects of Uganda in slavery, invaded Uganda last year and killed a Soudanese officer, and had after that invaded Usaga and Toru. I am not at present prepared to say when Papers can be laid before Parliament with regard to these events.

Is this information taken from the Report of Colonel Colvile?

It has been taken from his Despatches.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he is now iii a position to state when the new cruiser for the protection of the fisheries around the Island of Lewis and the western mainland will be ready for service?

The new cruiser is now at Granton. Specifications and estimates are being prepared for the alterations necessary to be made to her. When they have been accepted the work will be pushed on at once, but it is impossible to say yet on what date they will be finished. No time is being lost.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state the reason why Sheriff Johnstone, who acted as Returning Officer for Ross and Cromarty at the last Parliamentary election, engaged E. Hugonin, of Inverness, to act as polling clerk at Milton of Applecross, at an expense to the candidates of £9 Is., travelling allowance (140 miles) £7, whilst a suitable person was obtainable in the district; and whether Sheriff Johnstone, should he act as Returning Officer at the next election, will be prohibited from making arrangements which cause such expenditure to candidates?

I am informed that the polling clerk referred to was employed because, in the Sherift's opinion, a local man was not sufficiently qualified, and that although he lives in Inverness, he paid his own expenses from Inverness to Dingwall. There is no power to interfere with the discretion of a Returning Officer in making arrangements for an election.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information as to the shipment of slaves from Portuguese territories in West Africa to the Islands of San Thomè and Principè; whether the shipment of such slaves is in contravention of the General Act of the Brussels Conference to which Portugal affixed her signature; and whether steps will be taken to put a stop to this practice?

Slavery is abolished in the Colony of Angola, and in the Islands of San Thomè and Principe. If in spite of this there were a slave traffic, of which we have no knowledge, the slaves would become free when landed in the islands.

Will the hon. Baronet make inquiries?

I think if the hon. Member has any information to give on these points, he might communicate it to the Foreign Office, who would then look into the matter.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any information has been received at the Foreign Office, from Constantinople or elsewhere, to the effect that an outbreak of cholera has occurred at Mecca; and whether, if so, steps will be taken to urge the Porte to carry out the recommendations of the Sanitary Congress as to preventive and repressive measures?

It was reported on the 2nd instant that, according to the latest telegraphic advices from Mecca, the public health there was good. The Porte was represented at the Sanitary Congress, but its Delegates did not sign the recommendations.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will sanction the payment of the travelling expenses of the County Councillors who are engaged on the Boundary Committees under the recent Act?

The question whether the expenses referred to are expenses of a Committee within the meaning of Section 72 of the Local Government Act, 1894, is a legal one; and as the Board may have to determine the point in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction on appeals against the decision of auditors, they have not been prepared to advise on the question of the legality of such payments. If the payment is lawful, no sanction of the Board can be required.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many appointments it is intended to create at the War Office for Quartermasters of Cavalry, Infantry, Army Service Corps, Ordnance Store Corps, and Medical Staff respectively, under paragraphs 193 and 193A, Royal Warrant, dated 1st April, 1894?

The Articles referred to apply to the limited number of Quartermasters at present employed at headquarters. I am not aware of any existing necessity for an increase of that number.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether heavy subsidies are paid by this country and by the Canadian Government to the owners of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company's Royal Mail steamships, in order to maintain direct sea communication between China and Vancouver; whether he is aware the officials of the British post offices at Shanghai and the other Chinese Treaty Ports refuse nevertheless to send parcels to the Dominion by the Canadian Pacific Mail, and insist on forwarding them to Canada viâ, London, 12,000 miles further; and whether he will order that in future there shall be an exchange of parcels direct by means of the Canadian Pacific Mail?

The Canadian Pacific Railway Company receives a subsidy for the conveyance of mails, troops, and stores between Canada and Hong Kong viâ Vancouver and Shanghai. To this subsidy the Canadian Government contributes. It is true that parcels for Canada from Hong Kong and from the Agencies of the Hong Kong Post Office at Shanghai and other ports in China, are sent by way of London. But the British Post Office has heard nothing of the refusals and insistences referred to. If the Canadian and Hong Kong Post Offices desired an exchange of parcel mails by the Canadian Pacific steamer, I should place no obstacles in the way.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the foreign administration of the Customs Service of China has for 25 years conveyed the mails of all the Union countries from Chinkiang to Pekin, and whether in 1886 official negotiations were opened for the transfer of the whole business of the British Postal Agencies in China to that Customs Service, the proposal being approved by the British Postmaster General; whether he is aware that serious dissatisfaction with certain features of the existing British service prevails at the Treaty Ports; and whether he will consider the possibility of accomplishing the transfer contemplated in 1886 to the Chinese Customs Service?

Her Majesty's Government are aware that this question was raised in 1886, and that it was then decided that it was not ripe for decision. A similar proposition was recently mentioned to Her Majesty's Minister at Pekin by the Chinese Inspector General of Customs and referred to the Postmaster General, who saw no reason to depart from the views originally expressed. Her Majesty's Government are not aware of any serious dissatisfaction at the Treaty Ports with regard to the existing arrangements, but the whole question was in April last referred to Her Majesty's Ministers for a Report, which must be awaited before further steps can be taken in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the cases of the deportation of paupers from Greenock to the Enniskillen Union; and whether, having regard to the condition of the Law of Settlement, he will take early steps to have the same altered, in the interest of already overburdened Irish ratepayers?

I am aware of the facts connected with these two cases of removal to Ireland; and, as regards the second paragraph, I cannot add anything to the replies to similar inquiries which have already been addressed to me from time to time.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Board of Trade have yet arranged with the Railway Companies entering the Metropolis to allow workwomen to travel by trains at workmen's trains fares up to 8 o'clock in the morning; and, if not, will he expedite the matter, so that workwomen, who are employed in the Metropolis, may not be compelled to wait about the railway stations or in the streets until their places of business are open?

The Board of Trade are in communication with the Railway Association, and have received a promise that inquiries shall be promptly made. The hon. Member will understand that a reasonable time must be given the Association to collect the necessary information from the Railway Companies. The Board of Trade quite appreciate the importance of the question raised by my hon. Friend, and the matter shall not be lost sight of.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether Mr. W. Jeffcot, who was formerly extensively employed as a landlords' valuer in County Derry, has been recently engaged as a Sub-Commissioner in fixing judicial rents in the county; whether he has been selected to act as a Sub-Commissioner in the Counties of Fermanagh and Monaghan, where he will have to fix rents upon estates which he formerly valued for the landlord; and whether he will direct the attention of the Land Commission to the matter?

The Land Commission have found it necessary to communicate with Mr. Jeffcot on this subject, and pending this gentleman's reply I must ask my hon. Friend to defer the question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the year 1880 several tenants of Mr. John Madden, of Hilton Park, occupying farms in the district of Cloone, South Leitrim, were evicted from their holdings, and on making settlement with their landlord were afterwards reinstated in their tenancies; whether he is aware that, notwithstanding their settlement of the rent and costs due to the landlord, these tenants are now considered future tenants, and excluded from the fair rent benefits of the Irish Land Laws; and whether he will communicate with the Laud Commission to see if there is any way by which these farmers can have fair rents fixed on their holdings to enable them to compete with the adjoining farmers who are judicial tenants?

I am informed that 27 tenants on this property were evicted between 1879 and 1886, that 25 of them were re-admitted as tenants in 1891 and two in 1893, and that in all these cases a settlement of the arrears of rent and costs was made, and agreements for new tenancies for 15 years entered into. If my information is correct these tenants would be future tenants within the meaning of the Act of 1881, and the Land Commission would have no jurisdiction to fix fair rents on their holdings. In any case the Land Commission could not determine whether the persons referred to are entitled to have fair rents fixed until the applications come before them for judicial decision.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland what is the law relative to the supply of free books in schools, and when penalties are attached to the non-compliance therewith on the part of the School Boards; and whether he will cause to be issued a Circular to School Boards in Scotland setting these forth?

As I have already stated, the Department requires as a condition of efficiency that there shall be an adequate supply of books, and holds that a fixed charge for the use of books is not consistent with the relief of fees, and would consequently involve the loss of the fee grant, where it is allowed on account of such relief. Further than this I cannot go, as the Department has no power to give an authoritative opinion on questions of law.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the Rules of the Department on this matter are the same in England?

I can only speak for the Scotch Office, but I believe that they are substantially the same.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs who is in charge of the interests of Great Britain in Peru during the absence of Sir Charles Mansfield; if the Republic has recovered from the crisis arising on the death of President Bermudez; and in whose hands the chief Executive authority now rests?

Mr. Alfred St. John, Her Majesty's Consul at Callao, will be in charge of Her Majesty's Legation at Lima during the absence of Sir Charles Mansfield. Colonel Borgono, who was second Vice President under the late President Bermudez, is at present at the head of the Government. The Presidential Election is to take place this month, after which it will, I hope, be possible to form a more accurate opinion as to the political situation in Peru.

Is the country quiet now?

Yes, I believe so.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that at the British Settlement and Treaty Port of Tien Tsin, China, the English inhabitants have no postal arrangements provided for them; whether he is aware that the Germans, the French, and the Russians have post offices there; whether 90 per cent, of the whole mail matter of the Settlement is British, and the trade with Great Britain and her Dependencies amounts to several millions sterling annually; whether he is aware that the British mails which now arrive at that important Treaty Port of Tien Tsin are now handed over to the German post office there for distribution; and whether he will at once communicate with Hong Kong regarding this grievance?

Her Majesty's Government have no special information on the various points raised in this question, but Her Majesty's Minister at Pekin will be instructed to report on the subject.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when Sir E. Hertslet's Map of Africa by Treaty is likely to be completed and published?

It is expected that the work will be completed and published within the next few weeks, and when this is done it will supply in the most complete way the book of reference for which the hon. Member for Northampton asked the other day.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education if he can arrange that the evidence given before the Royal Commission on Secondary Education may be published at short intervals, say monthly, as the Commission has so far held its sittings in private?

My right hon. Friend the Vice President has asked me to answer this question. In reply to my hon. Friend, I have to say that the Secondary Education Commissioners, after very careful consideration, unanimously decided that in the interests of the inquiry wherewith they are charged it was better that the evidence should not be issued till it appeared all together along with their Report.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been called to Clauses 3, 4, and 5 of the Supreme Court of Judica- ture (Procedure) Bill, brought from the Lords; and whether these clauses, or any other clauses in the Bill, are capable of being construed to confer upon the English Judges the power of making Rules which would give them jurisdiction over persons domiciled in Scotland, or would otherwise interfere with the independence of the Scottish Courts; and, if so, whether the Government will propose amendments to guard against any such conflict of laws?

I do not think that the Bill would confer upon the English Judges the power of making Rules which would give them jurisdiction over persons domiciled and resident in Scotland, or which would interfere with the independence of the Scottish Courts.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will introduce and try to pass this Session the promised Bill to amend the admitted defects of the Mines Regulation Act with reference to the appointment of check-weighers?

I am very anxious, as my hon. Friend knows, to have the law on this subject amended, and I shall do all in my power to press the matter forward. But I fear that I cannot at this moment give any more specific undertaking.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been directed to a report appearing in the local papers of a meeting of the Limerick Board of Guardians, from which it appears that the Mayor of the city, acting on a certificate from the medical officer of the Union, had two children who were suffering from rabies sent to the Pasteur Institute for treatment; and whether, as President of the Local Government Board, he would see that the expenses in connection with the case would be sanctioned, as compliance with the law by the children becoming inmates of the workhouse in the first instance might have led to fatal results?

My attention has been drawn to a newspaper report of the proceedings of the Limerick Guardians at the meeting referred to. Boards of Guardians are legally empowered to send inmates of workhouses to any hospital for special treatment and to pay the incidental expenses. The Pasteur Institute in Paris is recognised as such a special hospital, and the sanction of the Local Government Board is not requisite to the payment of expenses in such cases. There is, however, no legal authority enabling Boards of Guardians to send to hospitals persons who are not workhouse inmates, and no sanction given by the Local Government Board would legalise such, expenditure, or in any way authorise the auditor to pass it.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state whether Mr. Malcolm McNeill, Secretary to the Board of Supervision, is the same person who visited the Island of Lewis and canvassed crofters with the object of inducing them to emigrate to Saltcoats and Killarney, Canada; if so, whether Mr. McNeill received a commission from the Colonisation Board, the Kootenay Valley Railway Company, or other source, for engaging in this work; and whether his salary as Secretary to the Board of Supervision was paid him whilst thus employed; by whose permission he was allowed to engage in this work; and by whom were his travelling and maintenance expenses paid whilst so employed?

Mr. McNeill, the present Secretary to the Board of Supervision, was directed by Lord Lothian, as Secretary for Scotland, to receive applications from crofters in the Lews and elsewhere who were desirous of emigrating to Canada under the Government Colonisation Scheme; he was at that time Visiting and Inspecting Officer under the Board of Supervision, and he received remuneration from the Colonisation Board for the special and very laborious duty on which he was engaged, but from no other source. No inducements were used towards the crofters other than publication of the conditions of colonisation. Mr. McNeill's salary, travelling expenses, and maintenance were paid as usual, and permission to engage in the duty was obtained from the Board of Supervision at the request of the Secretary for Scotland.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that Sheriff Johnstone, Returning Officer for Ross and Cromarty at the last Parliamentary election, engaged as Presiding Officers, amongst others, Sheriff Substitute Mackenzie, of Dornoch, Sutherland-shire, and also a great number of persons living out of the county, who travelled by road and rail, but chiefly by rail, to and from the polling stations, distances amounting in the aggregate to 1,539½ miles, or an average of 128£ miles, for whom the Returning Officer charged £155 7s. 6d., including 1s. per mile travelling allowance: whether steps will be taken to require Sheriff Johnstone, or other Returning Officer, in future to select the requisite officials as far as possible from persons residing in or near the respective polling districts; and whether the Returning Officer will be prohibited from allowing 1s. a mile to Presiding Officers and polling clerks as travelling allowance to places to which there are ordinary travelling facilities?

Upon inquiry I am informed that the facts are substantially as stated by the hon. Member, non-resident Presiding Officers being in certain cases employed as the most suitable persons available, but that travelling expenses were not allowed except within the county, and that the employment of non-residents had therefore the same effect as regards expenses as if they had been resident in the county. The conduct of Parliamentary elections and the charges of Returning Officers are regulated by Statute, and I cannot interfere with the discretion of Returning Officers without relieving them of their responsibilities.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state upon what grounds the Lord Chancellor has refused to grant any abatement of rent this year to the tenants on the estate of George L. Kittson, Listowel, County Kerry, an abatement of 15 per cent, having been allowed last year, when prices were much higher than at present?

The Lord Chancellor informs me that the tenants referred to hold under judicial rents. A special abatement of 15 per cent. was given last year to some of the tenants at the suggestion of the Receiver as an inducement to prompt payment, which the circumstances of the estate at the time required. In the present year the Receiver reported that there were no grounds to justify a general abatement, and the Lord Chancellor adopted that Report, and directed the Receiver to bring under his notice any cases calling for special consideration. Any such case brought before the Lord Chancellor will be carefully considered by him.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the Permanent Settlement of Bengal put a limit on the Government demand payable on incomes derived from land; whether the cost of the Cadastral Survey and the annual maintenance of the record-of-right in the Province of Behar is to be borne by the Government, as in other Provinces, or by the landlords and tenants as an addition to the Government demand; whether the Hon. C. C. Stevens, senior member of the Bengal Board of Revenue, and other local officials, have recorded their opinion that under existing arrangements the main burden of the survey will fall on the cultivators alone; and whether the Government will order the survey to be suspended in Behar until the local Reports on the meaning of the recent tree-smearing in that Province have been received and considered?

The Permanent Settlement Regulation of May, 1793, fixed in perpetuity the Land Revenue demand of the Government in parts of Bengal; but it is established that the Regulation of 1793 does not bar the levy of Income Tax upon landed incomes, or the levy of local rates for local purposes. The cost of the Cadastral Survey will be defrayed partly by the Government, partly by the zemindars, and partly by the ryots. It has not yet been decided how the record of rights will be maintained in future years. At page 104 of the Papers presented to Parliament on this subject in November last will be found Mr. Stevens' Opinion, to which apparently the hon. Member refers. He says stringent precautions will be required to prevent the whole cost falling on the ryots; and he further expresses his belief that, even if the ryots had to bear the whole cost, the benefit secured to them would be worth the outlay. It is, moreover, the intention of the Government of India to take every possible precaution to prevent an undue proportion of the cost falling upon the ryots. It is not proposed to suspend the Cadastral Survey at present.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade when the Return recently moved for of the number of Inquiries into Fatal Accidents to Railway Servants will be issued?

The Return is in the hands of the printer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the decision of the Strabane Board of Guardians, at their meeting on Tuesday last, not to proceed with the building of 12 houses in the Urney divisions, with regard to which the Local Government Board had already empowed their Inspector to proceed; and whether the Local Government Board will now take steps to secure the erection of suitable habitations in accordance with their previous decision?

The Guardians of this Union having decided not to build the labourers' cottages, the Local Government Board have instructed their Inspector to take action under the Order which they have issued in pursuance of the 8th section of the Labourers Act of 1891.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Board have received from a body of labourers in the neighbourhood of Raphoe a complaint as to the matter in which the Strabane Board of Guardians have dealt with representations made to them under the Labourers Acts in respect of the dwellings of the persons in question; and what the Local Government Board propose to do in the matter?

The Local Government Board have received from Mr. John Crawford, of Raphoe, the complaint referred to, and have informed him that the matter will receive the attention of the Board. The matter will be considered in conjunction with the general question of the carrying out of the Labourers Acts in this Union by the Board's Inspector instead of by the Board of Guardians.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has yet received any Report as to the result of the inquiry recently made in connection with deaths in the Lunatic Department of the Belfast Workhouse, and the information to be supplied to the City Coroner?

The Local Government Board Commissioner who proceeded to Belfast to inquire into this matter informs me that the differences that had arisen between the Guardians and the Coroner appeared to have been the result of a misunderstanding rather than of an actual disagreement. On the subject of the information to be supplied by the Guardians to the Coroner concerning persons dying in the lunatic wards, the Coroner explained to the Commissioner the reasons his queries must be answered in order to enable him to decide whether an inquest was necessary. When this was communicated to the Guardians by the Commissioner they at once made an order directing their staff to furnish as fully as possible all the information in their possession to the officers of the Coroner's Court, so as to-facilitate the Coroner in deciding whether an inquest was necessary or not. The Guardians assured the Commissioner that far from wishing to withhold any information about their lunatic department they had always been willing to afford it; but it seems that a hitch had arisen, owing to the Coroner having directed certain queries to be answered by the medical officer which that gentleman was not in a position to reply to.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if, having regard to the infinitesimal proportion of mounted men in the Volunteer Force compared to the 200,000 Infantry, he will consider the desirability of increasing the number of the former by an addition to the ordinary capitation grant of say £5 a year, to cover the heavy expenses attending the provisions of horses?

The formation of mounted companies in the Volunteers was sanctioned on the understanding that no additional expense beyond that of Volunteer Infantry was to be thrown upon the public; and, inasmuch as in any scheme of mobilization for the defence of the country the Volunteers would form part of a conglomerate force, which is already amply provided with cavalry, I am not prepared to deviate from that principle.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, when a cathedral is also a parish church, it is intended under the Welsh Disestablishment Bill to transfer its ownership to the proposed Commissioners?

It appears from such information as I can obtain that three of the Welsh cathedrals—namely, Bangor, St. David's, and Llandaff—are used for parochial as well as for cathedral services, and that in these places there is no separate parish church. Under the Bill the fabric of these buildings would be transferred to the Commissioners, subject not only to all existing parochial rates, but to the power of the Church body to require their continued user as cathedrals for their present purposes.

Would the right of the parochial authorities be absolute, and not dependent upon the Commissioners?

Yes, certainly.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is the ease that there is now no Vote on Estimates on which the proceedings of the Royal Niger Company can be questioned, except it be the Foreign Office Vote; whether the Foreign Office receive from the Company detailed accounts showing the amount of trade in liquor, spirit licences, arms, and gunpowder, as contrasted with all other trade; and whether it would be possible to lay such accounts before Parliament, together with an annual Report on the proceedings of the Company?

The answer to the first question is in the affirmative. The trade accounts of the Company are not submitted to the Foreign Office. The present position is that the Government, after an exhaustive inquiry into the expenses of administration, have sanctioned a maximum amount to be levied in duties for a fixed period. The Government could not press the Company to submit its trade accounts; there is no Government officer in the territories of the Company to prepare an annual Report, but one is laid by the Company before its shareholders.

Having regard to the engagements of the Government in reference to Central Africa on the question of traffic in arms and liquor, could not the Government inquire of the Company as to the amount of trade in these articles?

I will see what inquiries can be made. I can make no promise beyond that.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he can now state when the Government propose to introduce their promised Bill to amend the Crofters Act; if he can say what progress the Deer Forest Commission has made since last Report; and whether the presence of two of the Commissioners for some time here in London interferes with the proceedings of the said Commission?

The Deer Forest Commission have now concluded their inquiry in Argyllshire, having already dealt with districts of Inverness-shire, Ross-shire, Caithness, and Sutherland. They meet to-day in Edinburgh, and I hope that the two Commissioners referred to by the hon. Member will be present. As regards the Bill to amend the Crofters Act, I have on previous occasions answered several questions, and I can only say that ample notice will be given of the intentions of the Government.

Is not the Government pledged to introduce the Bill this Session?

The Government is pledged, so far as human pledges can be carried out, to introduce a Bill extending the advantages of the Crofters Act to crofter leaseholders.

Does not the failure to introduce it amount to a breach of faith?

Was it not understood on the 27th of April that an endeavour would be made to engraft the two provisions contained in my Resolution on the Crofters Act? Did not the right hon. Gentleman then indicate he would engraft on the Bill provisions dealing with enlarged holdings and bringing more crofters under the Act?

Did the hon. Member for Argyllshire on that occasion not express his satisfaction with the Government? and did he not in consequence decline to put them to the trouble of a Division on the subject?

The Motion of the hon. Gentleman referred to a much larger Bill by which to carry out the proposals then made, and that Bill cannot be introduced until information has been obtained from the Commission.

Are we to conclude that the Government have no intention to introduce a Bill this Session?

What Bill?

The Bill to enlarge the terms of the Crofters Act, and to bring in the leaseholders.

I feel, as the Representative of a large crofting county much disappointed—

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, at the Poor Law Election in March last for the Ahascragh Division of the Union of Ballinasloe, the voting for the two candidates was even; that one of the candidates, Mr. Andrew Manning, called for a sworn inquiry, and undertook to prove that two of the voting papers signed for the other candidate had been forged; and whether the Local Government Board refused the inquiry; and, if so, upon what grounds?

I am informed that the facts are as stated in the first paragraph. Under Section 23 of the 6th & 7th Vict., c. 92, the Local Government Board are empowered in any case in which the right of a person to act as elected Guardian is questioned to inquire into the circumstances, and should the Board be of opinion that a person has been wrongly returned by the Returning Officer the Board issue an order setting aside the Return and a further order for a new election. It will thus be seen that it is only where a person has been actually returned as Guardian that the necessity for taking action under the section arises, and if the Return is shown to be wrong the Board can only take steps for a fresh election. In the present case, no person has been returned as Guardian by the Returning Officer for the reason stated in the question, and a new election must take place without any action on the part of the Board. Even if an inquiry were held and the objections, of Mr. Manning substantiated, the result would be the same; that is to say, a new election would be necessary.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the case of Michael Boland, of Bunnygaddy, Curraghroe, Strokestown, who applied to the Board of Works for a loan of £35 for the drainage and improvement of his holding, which he had purchased under Lord Ashbourne's Act; is he aware that the proposed works were duly inspected and approved of by the Local Government Board Inspector, and the applicant directed to proceed with same, on the understanding that the loan would be forthcoming; is he aware that, when the first instalment became payable, the loan was refused by the Board of Works on the ground that the applicant could do the required works by the labour of his own family, though he has but one son living with him whose labour would be so available, and the great bulk of the work should be paid for; is he aware that great dissatisfaction has been occasioned by similar action in other cases on the part of the Board of Works; and will he direct the facts of this particular case to be reconsidered, with the view of granting this loan to Michael Boland?

(who replied) said: I am informed that the applicant was neither directed nor authorised to proceed with the works, and the Board of Works Inspector denies that he ever instructed him to do so. He reported that the works were calculated to improve the holding, but that most of them could be done by the applicant or his family. No instalment became payable, as the loan was never granted. The applicant has produced no evidence to show that the great bulk of the work would have to be paid for. The Board of Works are not aware of any general dissatisfaction caused by the policy adopted Each case is treated on its merits. I am not aware of any circumstances which would suggest a reconsideration of the case.

Is it not the fact that when the Inspector approved of the works, the ordinary course of procedure would have been for the work to be at once commenced, the understanding being that the loan would be granted. Was anything contrary stated to this man on the occasion of the Inspector's visit?

I cannot say what the man was led to understand. The fact is, the Inspector, while approving the proposed works, said the applicant could do them by the labour of his family.

But was not the man led to expect that the loan would be granted to him?

I am unable to say that.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, having regard to the fact that the Board of Trade stated on the 29th ultimo that a communication had been received from the Secretary of the Metropolitan Railway Company intimating that the question of foul air between certain specified stations on that line would probably receive the attention of the Board at its next meeting, and seeing that a meeting of the Board was held on the 30th ultimo, he is now prepared to say what action, if any, is to be taken in providing for the better ventilation of the tunnels?

The Board of Trade have now received a communication from the Railway Company in which it is stated that the atmosphere of the tunnel sections referred to can only be improved if the Local Authorities show themselves willing to accord the Company reasonable facility for constructing openings into the roads running over the line of the tunnel. The Company further intimate that they will, as hitherto, exercise every precaution for maintaining the tunnel atmosphere in as good a condition as circumstances admit.

asked whether he would consider the desirability of following some American examples of electric traction, with the object of securing a better atmosphere in the tunnels; and whether the Local Authorities had been asked to allow openings to be made?

said, he presumed from the tenour of the letter of the Company that they had. No doubt, the use of electric traction would help to purify the atmosphere.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will lay upon the Table of the House all Papers, Correspondence, &c, between the Peruvian Bondholders Committee and the Foreign Office in relation to a settlement of the external debt of Peru, such Papers to include Despatches to Ministers and Consuls, whether in Chile or Peru, who represent the British Government?

The correspondence on this subject is extremely voluminous, extending over the last 10 years. The claims of the British bondholders have been satisfied by an arrangement with the Governments of Chile and Peru which is in course of execution. The disposal of a sum of money which was deposited in the Bank of England by the Chilean Government for distribution among the creditors of Peru whose claims are secured upon guano, and to a share in which the bondholders may be entitled, is about to be submitted to arbitration by the Swiss Federal Court. Under the circumstances, it does not appear that any useful purpose would be served by presenting the Papers to Parliament.

inquired if the right hon. Gentleman was aware that the second moiety which should have been paid to the bondholders has, in consequence of some protest by Peru, not been handed over to the bondholders, who unfortunately in this country had lost something like £8,000,000. Would he not in their interests take some action to expedite matters.

I cannot say more low, as the question is to go before the Arbitrators.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he has had his attention drawn to a report of the proceedings at the Newry Petty Sessions on Wednesday last by which it appears that Mr. John O'Hare, one of the recently appointed Magistrates, was fined 2s. 6d. and costs for drunkenness on the streets of Newry; and whether he will draw the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the matter?

Is it not a fact that Mr. O'Hare was only appointed Town Justice because of his position as Town Commissioner for Warrenpoint, is he not a man over 80 years of age, and has he not ceased to act in any public capacity since the death of his wife? Is it not the case, too, that he is not in the Commission of the Peace at all?

As the hon. Member for Kerry suggests, Mr. O'Hare is not in the Commission of the Peace.

I never said he was.

The question certainly lends itself to that construction, otherwise there is no point in it at all. As Town Commissioner for Warrenpoint he was also Town Justice for the limited purposes of the Towns Improvement Act, but inasmuch as he ceased to be Town Commissioner in October of last year, his term of office as Town Justice also expired on the same date.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Antrim, I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether in the approaching cruise of the Channel Fleet it will visit Belfast Lough a ad Lough Foyle?

I regret that I cannot hold out hopes that the Channel Squadron will visit Belfast and Lough Foyle in the month of June. Visits to Queenstown, Lough Swilly, Stornoway, and Greenock are included in the cruise. But at the time of the Manœuvres, some of Her Majesty's ships will, as usual, put into certain places on the coast of Ireland.

Can the right hon. Baronet say why the Fleet is not going to Belfast or Derry?

It is not for me to state the reasons for the Fleet visiting one port and not another. If the hon. Member will wait till the Manœuvres possibly he will hear of visits to other ports.

Will the Fleet be sent to Belfast for the 12th of July?

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he would consider the advisability of increasing the pay of rural postmen in Ireland, as the present scale is entirely inadequate in comparison with other branches of the Service? At the same time, I will ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that the maximum pay of the Dublin postmen exceeds those of Cork by 6s. per week, and Bel-last postmen by 4s. per week; and how is this disparity determined?

The wages of rural postmen in Ireland have been largely improved during the last few years, and as no difficulty is found in obtaining the services of suitable men as postmen, it does not appear that any further general increase is required. In any case, the present rate of payment compares favourably with the wages usually earned for the same class of labour in Ireland at the present time. The maximum wages paid to postmen in Dublin have always been higher than those paid at provincial towns in Ireland, but they are 2s. only above those paid at Belfast, not 4s., as supposed by the hon. Member. There seems to be good reason for this, as the cost of living, &c, is higher in Dublin than elsewhere.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think 8s. or 9s. a week sufficient pay for a man walking 25 miles a day?

I know of no such cases.

Then I will supply the right hon. Gentleman with innumerable instances.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that within the last week cattle belonging to a Mr. Wray at Woodville, County Kildare, were severely stabbed; if he has any evidence to show what was the motive for the outrage; and whether any arrests have been made in connection with it?

It is a fact that on the night of the 21st instant a mare and a heifer, the property of the person named, were maliciously injured. Proceedings are now pending against one man in connection with the outrage, and under these circumstances I must decline to disclose the opinion of the police as to the motive for its commission.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that at the Ennistymon (County Clare) Baronial Sessions, on the 11th ultimo, the following claims for compensation for alleged malicious injuries were made by persons in occupation of farms from which Mr. Blake Forster had been recently evicted: Richard Reynolds, Ballykeale, Kilfenora, burning of a rick of hay, £20; Richard Reynolds, mutilation of cattle, £20; Mr. Murray, Ballykeale House, damage to aqueduct, £20; whether he is aware that these claims were preferred on affidavits of the claimants; whether the claims of Reynolds were disallowed and the claim of Murray was withdrawn; under what circumstances the disallowance and withdrawal occurred; and whether the attention of the Attorney General has been directed to these cases?

The facts are substantially as stated in the first three paragraphs of the question. The claim of Reynolds for the hay was rejected because it was sworn that one of his-sons stands committed for trial at the next Assizes charged with setting fire to-the hay, and there was a suspicion that another of his sons mutilated the cattle for which he also claims compensation. The claim of Murray was withdrawn, because no damage was done to the aqueduct since the claim had been lodged. I have referred all the papers in the matter to the Attorney General for consideration?

Is the Chief Secretary aware that there is a strong feeling in this part of County Clare that many of the alleged malicious injuries are in realty of a bogus character, and are got up largely by the persons who claim compensation? Will the right hon. Gentleman take any steps to prevent men of the character of Reynolds from being placed in the occupation of evicted farms?

I have heard stories about the bogus character of many of the alleged malicious injuries, but I have not the slightest information as to what value is to be attached to them. I have no power whatever to prevent particular persons from taking charge of evicted farms.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that last week a valuable cow, the property of Surgeon O'Grady, at Abbeyfeale, County Limerick, was mutilated in so shocking a manner that it died from the houghing it received; can he say what is alleged to have been the cause of such outrage; and has any person been made amenable?

I have received a Police Report of the outrage referred to in the first paragraph of the question. No person has yet been made amenable for the outrage, the motive assigned for the commission of which being that the animal was believed to be the property, not of Surgeon O'Grady, but of another person in the locality, who had cattle grazing on evicted lauds.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a considerable number of the cottages erected under the Labourers' Acts in the South and West of Ireland are in the occupation of persons who are not labourers; and whether he is willing to give a Return of such cottages occupied by persons who are not bonâ fide labourers?

The Local Government Board inform me that they are not aware that a considerable number of cottages erected under the Labourers' Acts are in the occupation of persons who cannot be deemed to be agricultural labourers within the meaning of the Acts. The occupants of these cottages have been selected by the Local Authorities, the Boards of Guardians, and as it is evident they consider the parties to be within the provisions of the Acts, I see no sufficient reason for granting a Return on the subject.

inquired if the right hon. Gentleman's attention had been directed to recent proceedings before the Irish Privy Council, in which it transpired that in one Union five of these cottages were occupied by persons who were not labourers? Would he not, under the circumstances, further inquire?

I am not aware of the details of that case, but if the hon. Member will lay the facts before me, either privately or in the form of a question on the Paper, I will inquire.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the measurements of the shortest route between New York and Liverpool, viâ Moville, and between New York and Greenock, viâ, Moville' as given by the Admiralty, differ most materially from the measurement of the Atlantic Shipping Companies; and whether, in view of ascertaining the shortest route for the conveyance of American mails, he will direct some further investigation to be made?

The distances across the Atlantic given by the Admiralty to the Postmaster General, with reference to the questions which he answered on the 6th of April and the 24th of May, were the shortest navigable distances without regard to seasons or ice. The Admiralty are not aware what the distances as given by the Atlantic Shipping Companies may be; they may differ from Admiralty distances, because a less direct route must at some periods of the year be followed owing to the presence of ice. To attempt to force ships to take a definite fixed route, in order to save a few miles, might result in disaster. All that the Admiralty can offer to do is (if desired) to check the measurement of any route given by a Mail Company.

Has the Postmaster General had his attention called to a pamphlet, written by the hon. Member for Dundee, dealing with the subject?

Yes.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it is his intention to have a female Inspector of Factories appointed for Ireland?

No female Inspector is appointed for any particular place; they are all peripatetic, and it is not my intention to make any change in this respect. The present lady Inspectors have given and will continue to give special attention to Irish industries.

Is it not a fact that the importance of the linen industry in the North of Ireland justifies the appointment of a special female Inspector?

I do not think so.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the day promised for the discussion of Indian Finance will be announced?

I am not in a position to make any statement at present.

In the absence of the hon. Member for the Stretford Division of South-East Lancashire, I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consent to the adjournment of the House on Tuesday night until Thursday, to give a little rest to the Members and officials of the House who have been so constant in their attendance?

No, Sir; I fear that the House has no superfluity of time which it can divert from public business to the purpose indicated in the question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to statements made at a Missionary Conference in London by Lord Stanmore, a former Governor of Fiji, to the effect that women are there by law flogged for bathing on Sunday, and that many other innocent exercises of personal liberty are punishable by fine and imprisonment; whether these restrictions are still imposed on the natives of Fiji; who imposes them; and whether the Code of Laws which allows these punishments has had the sanction of the Colonial Office? The hon. Member, in putting the question, said he believed the statements referred to Tonga and not Fiji.

In reply to this question, Lord Stanmore has written as follows:—

"In writing of the undue forcing of Western ways upon 'different islands in the Pacific,' I did not refer to Fiji, and thought it very manifest that I did not do so. The groups I had in my mind were the Friendly Islands and Wallis Island, as they were in the days when I was in the Pacific. It was a village in Fiji under the Wesleyan Mission that I described as a pleasant contrast to all this absurdity."

May I ask when copies of the Anglo-Italian Covention will be circulated?

There is no objection to circulating them as soon as possible.

There is an impression that the Agreement is being kept back, and as all sorts of misleading statements have been made with regard to its contents, I hope we may be assured there shall be no further delay, especially as the Agreement in reference to the Congo, which was made two days later, has already been circulated.

There is no reason for keeping it back other than the purely mechanical ones connected with printing and distribution.

I should like to put a Question to the Leader of the House, and, in order that it may be clear, may I remind him and the House that on Friday we had a very interesting Debate and Division on the Uganda policy of the Government, but from the necessities of the case that Debate and Division were taken upon the propriety of the Government retaining Uganda, and, of course, we supported them in that policy. But in the course of the speech of the Under Secretary it became apparent that the Government had not made up their minds to do that which, at all events, most of us on this side think necessary for carrying out that policy—namely, the constructing of the railroad. It was impossible for us either to debate or to divide on that very important matter; and I would ask the Government whether they would consider the propriety of giving us some opportunity of discussing it and having a Division upon it? I should put down the terms of the Motion I should like to see discussed. It would not be intended to be a Vote of Censure, and it would be to this effect—

"That this House, taking note of the decision of the Government to retain Uganda, assures them of its support in any action they may take to secure the construction of the railway as recommended in Sir Gerald Portal's Report."

When I promised to give a day to the discussion of Uganda, I meant to give a day. The right hon. Gentleman's Motion would have been perfectly in Order if it had been moved the other night. [Mr. A.J. BALFOUR: No.] At all events, the only answer I can give to the right hon. Gentleman at present is that I cannot give more time for the discussion of Uganda until we have got on with the Finance Bill.

Of course, I recognise that there is some reason in the observation of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to the pressing character of the business now before the House. I do not ask it as a right, for we do not put it as a Vote of Censure—as a Vote of Censure I presume the Government would feel called upon to give us the time—but I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will consider in a favourable light the propriety of granting the request I have made when the Finance Bill is further advanced.

I will consider that matter.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Antrim, I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether the omission of naval officers' names from the list of honours and rewards recently bestowed on the occasion of Her Majesty's birthday upon certain officers of Her Majesty's Military Forces is a departure from a well-recognised custom; whether the First Lord of the Admiralty was called upon to recommend names of naval officers for submission to Her Majesty; and whether he can state the total number of officers of Her Majesty's Army and Reserve Forces who were awarded honours and distinctions other than promotions in miltary rank as against the one naval officer so rewarded?

In recommendations for honours on the occasion of Her Majesty's birthday no departure has been made from recognised custom. The First Lord recommends the names of naval officers which are submitted to Her Majesty by the Secretary of State for War, with those of officers in the Army whom he recommends. The Admiralty possess no further information as to the last paragraph of the hon. Gentleman's question, beyond that given in The Gazette of the 26th of May. The number of officers on the Active List of the Army, who by rank are eligible for the Order of the Bath, is upwards of 4,000 against only about 700 in the Navy. The Rules laying down the qualifications of officers for this distinction are not identical in the two Services.

Am I to understand that the First Lord of the Admiralty is bound to submit names for Her Majesty's approval through the Secretary of State for War? Has not the First Lord of the Admiralty the right of audience in common with the Secretary of State for War?

As to the latter part of the question, of course every Cabinet Minister has opportunities of audience with Her Majesty. But the mode of action is as my hon. and gallant Friend states—namely, that the names are recommended by the First Lord of the Admiralty, and then submitted by the Secretary for War.

I beg to give notice that I shall put a question to the Leader of the House as to the right of audience.