I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade what has been the result of the complaint laid before that Board as to the hours of labour of signalmen at certain boxes at Kelvedon, Witham, and other places on the Great Eastern Railway; and, further, to ask him the dates of the various steps taken in respect of that complaint under the recent Act giving power in such matters to the Board of Trade?

The Great Eastern Railway Company have agreed to reduce the hours at two of the boxes complained of. My lion, and learned Friend drew attention to the matter on the 19th of February, and the Board of Trade communicated with the Company on the same day. The Board then received a formal representation under the Act from the lion. Member, and, after consulting their Inspecting Officers, called upon the Company on the 8th of March for a Return of the hours worked by their servants in certain cabins. This Return was received on the 27th of March and considered by the In- specting Officers, and on the 9th of April the Board ordered the Company to submit a revised Schedule of the Hours of Labour within one month. This Schedule was received on the 4th of May, and as it was unsatisfactory in terms a conference between the representatives of the Company and the officers of the Board of Trade was arranged, and took place on the 4th of June. The Board are considering what further action shall be taken in the matter.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been called to the statement contained in a Glasgow paper to the effect that in the Island of Coll, in consequence of his having incurred the displeasure of the proprietor of the Island by standing against the factor for the County Council, the Rev. Mr. Ross, Free Church minister there, had been subjected to many annoyances, the last move against him being the barricadiug of his front and kitchen doors by the factor by the erection of six rows of barbed wire fencing and the filling up of the well, from which the manse got its supply of water, with all sorts of filth and stones; whether it is true that the barricading with barbed wire fencing described was thrice renewed after removal; and whether the Procurator Fiscal has yet completed his inquiries into the case; and, if so, with what result?

It is the fact that there has been for some time a dispute between the Rev. Mr. Ross and the proprietor as to the right of the former to use an access to his manse through certain ground belonging to the latter, on which also the well in question was situated, and that the factor twice put up a barbed wire fence close to the manse doors, and filled up the well with stones, his object, as he states, being to have the respective rights of the parties legally tested, and the matter is now accordingly before the Sheriff. The proprietor was abroad at the time, and both he and the factor deny that their attitude towards Mr. Ross has been affected by the County Council election, though other statements are to an opposite effect. I may add that, although the extreme measures taken by the factor cannot be justified, Mr. Ross says that the proprietor has, of his own accord, never exacted more than the half of the feu duty due to him for the site of the manse, and that matters between them now seem likely to be arranged on the footing that Mr. Ross shall have a lease of the ground he wants, including the well, free of rent.

Will the right lion. Gentleman inquire into the statement of Mr. Ross, that the proprietor has offered to let him the land on nominal terms if he will abstain from opposing the factor for the County Council?

I will further inquire, but I may repeat that on one hand it is asserted that this dispute has nothing to do with County Council politics, and that this is denied on the other side.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will lay upon the Table of the House the Reports of the recent inquiries into the administration of the Newton Abbot Workhouse; whether Dr. Fuller, a gentleman who assisted at the recent inquiries, advised that the new nurse should be fully certificated; is he aware that the nurse who has been elected does not possess a midwifery certificate; that a considerable number of the Newton Abbot Workhouse Guardians protested against the legality of the nurse's election; and that the new master of the workhouse has been connected as an official with the workhouse during the time when its administration has necessitated the intervention of the Local Government Board; and if, under these circumstances, the Local Government Board can take any steps to set aside these appointments?

The Local Government Board have recently received the Report on the further inquiry which has been held by two of their Inspectors with respect to the administration of the Newton Abbot Workhouse, and the Report is now receiving the consideration of the Board. Dr. Fuller, one of the Board's Inspectors, recommended that the Guardians in appointing a nurse should obtain the services of one who is fully certificated. The Board have been informed by the Guardians of the appointments which have been made by them to the offices of master and nurse. The master, who resigned, has been re-elected; but his appointment will be considered by the Board in connection with the recent administration of the workhouse before it is approved of. The question of the fitness of the person who has been elected nurse will also be considered before the Board concur in the appointment. The Reports which are made to the Board by their Inspectors are confidential communications, and I am not prepared, therefore, to lay them upon the Table of the House.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will lay upon the Table of the House the names of the examiners for the leaving certificate, with their ordinary avocations and the salary paid to each?

There are no examiners for the leaving certificate in receipt of salaries. The Department is solely responsible for the awards made, and the revision of papers is carried on with the help of a large number of gentlemen, whose work is under supervision, and who are paid in proportion to the number of papers looked over by them. The names and numbers of those employed vary each year. I do not see what public object would be served by the publication of particulars, but perhaps when the Educational Estimate is discussed it may be considered whether the names of these gentlemen might be published in the annual Blue Book.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the lands of the Duchy of Lancaster are exempt from parochial and other rates and taxes when the laud is farmed by the Duchy?

I am informed that all the Duchy lands are liable to Land Tax if not redeemed. Inhabited House Duty is a tax on the occupier, but under "exemption" in 48 Geo. III., c. 55, where houses are occupied by Her Majesty or by caretakers, the tax is not payable or paid. Her Majesty is not liable for Property Tax, but she pays it, under Schedule A, on a fair valuation, and under Schedule B upon profits, if made. Except in a few cases where, by a statutory provision, lands are specially charged with rates, the Duchy is not liable to pay rates for land in hand, but contributes accordiug to a fair valuation, in analogy to what is done by the Offices of Works and of Woods.

Is the exemption under Statute?

I think so.

What Statute?

That I cannot say without notice.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the Department has received a Petition signed by 498 inhabitants and ratepayers of Nuneaton against the Scheme now proposed for the future administration of the Smith's School Charity; whether he is aware that since the Scheme was drawD up and advertised a large number of inhabitants and ratepayers have looked into it, with the result that public interest has been aroused which previously did not exist; and whether he will either refer the Scheme back to the Charity Commissioners or take some other step with a view to a further public local inquiry?

The statutory time for receiving objections to this Scheme expired on the 2nd of April last without any objection or suggestion having been received, and the Scheme was approved on the 18th of April. The Petition referred to in the hon. Member's question was received a few days ago, but I have no further jurisdiction in the matter. The attention of the petitioners has been directed to the section of the Act under which ratepayers or other parties concerned may claim that the Scheme shall be laid before Parliament.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Killarney Board of Guardians has been dissolved under sealed Order by the Local Government Board; and if he can state the financial position of the Board when the Vice Guardians took charge of the Union?

The Killarney Board of Guardians was dissolved by sealed Order of the Local Government Board dated the 12th instant. The estimated liabilities of the Union on the 15th instant were £7,147, and the assets, including uncollected rates, were £4,636.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether amongst the assets is included a sum of £421 due by labourers for rents of cottages built out of the rates; also for what period have the paid Guardians been appointed?

I am afraid I cannot answer either of those questions. I think, however, the amount of arrears is overstated.

I will put the question again on Monday.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what was the gross rental of the Enniskillen Royal School Estate for the last year; what were the expenses of management; and what part of the balance was spent for educational purposes?

The gross rental of the Enniskillen estate for year ended November, 1893, was £2,100 13s. 11d. The expenses of management amounted to £576 8s. 5d., leaving a balance of £1,524 5s. 6d. Out of this balance a, sum of £604 10s. 3d. was paid to retired masters in pursuance of the Scheme formed by the Educational Endowments Commissioners, leaving a sum of £919 15s. 3d. available for educational purposes, exclusive of dividends on Stock belonging to the endowment, amounting to £167 8s. 9d. The total sum thus available amounted to £1,087 4s., out of which a sum of £1,080 was divided be- tween the Fermanagh Local Boards of Education to be applied by them for the purposes of the Schemes.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether Reservists, on receiving appointments as telegraphists, have their Reserve pay of 6d. per diem deducted from their salary during their period of service with the Reserve?

I find that under the Regulations of the Postmaster General, made in 1885, men of the first-class Reserve appointed to the Post Office as telegraphists have their Reserve pay deducted from the Post Office salary of their position, partly to equalise their emoluments with those of other telegraphists, and partly because, though belonging to the Reserve, their time counts towards superannuation on their Post Office wages. Their service in the Reserve is compulsory under their original enlistment. Men in the supplemental Reserve, in which service is voluntary, do not have a deduction made from their Civil wages. The arrangement as it now stands does not commend itself to me, and I will inquire into it further.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office when the alterations to the barracks at Leeds will be completed; and when the barracks will be occupied?

The barracks at Leeds will be ready for occupation on the 1st of July. Troops will probably be moved in during the month of August.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that at a meeting of the Governors of Derry Lunatic Asylum, held on the 14th of this mouth, a Report was received from a Committee appointed to select a site for the new asylum for County Derry, in which they recommended as a site for the new asylum a farm at Granshaw containing 290 acres, and which is situated near the City of Derry; whether he is aware that all the members of this Committee live in or near the City of Derry; whether he is also aware that they had offers of sites from several central districts of the county, and whether they visited any of those but the one at Granshaw; that the Chairman of the Governors said at the meeting that the Committee had given the Governors no information, and that the Derry Governors were in a majority, and could do as they wished in this matter; and whether, in view of the fact that Derry is situated at the extreme end of the county, and therefore difficult>to get at from various parts of the county, the Board of Control will consider the interests of the county at large, previous to approving of any site?

The facts are correctly stated in the first two paragraphs. With regard to the remainder of the question, I am informed there were 20 offers of sites for the new asylum and that of these the Committee visited four —two being near Derry and two near Limavaddy. The Report of the Committee has not yet been laid officially before the Board of control, upon whom will devolve the entire legal responsibility in connection with the selection of a site. Before such selection is made the interests of the insane poor of the various portions of the district will be carefully considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Land Commission were aware of it that Thomas Whelan, who has applied to the Land Commission for an advance to purchase a holding at Ballinafina, County Waterford, stated on oath at the Presentment Sessions held at Carrickbeg on the 12th of May last, that he got possession of the holding in question on the 26th of February, 1894, and that prior to getting possession he signed the agreement to purchase; whether, if the facts are as stated, the Land Purchase Acts apply to such cases; whether, under the circumstances, the Land Commission, before making the advance, will make further inquiries into this case, and ascertain if any misrepresentation has been made to them; and whether the annuity to which Whelan will be subject if this sale is carried through will be £40, whereas the rent, for the non-payment of which the former tenant was evicted, was £79 a year?

The Land Purchase Acts only apply to enable tenants in occupation to purchase. An agreement to purchase where no tenancy or occupation under it existed and then the creation of a tenancy to carry it out would be improper and an evasion of the Acts. I have received a Report from the Land Commission, but am making further inquiries in the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in accordance with the promise he made last year (in answer to a Question), he has conferred with Mr. Attorney General with a view to taking steps to put an end, in the public interest, to the practice whereby Justices' clerks, whose duty it is to advise the Magistrates in licensing cases, regularly act as solicitors for brewers and licensed victuallers in connection with the sale or transfer of public houses in respect of which application subsequently come before such Justices; and, if so, with what result; and whether, in the interests of justice, he will now take steps to secure that Magistrates' clerks shall cease to occupy the conflicting positions of being, in connection with the same cases, in the first instance the legal advisers to Courts of Petty Sessions, and afterwards the prosecuting solicitors before Quarter Sessions, with extra remuneration for each case committed for trial?

I did confer with the late Attorney General on the matter. We found on inquiry that the practice, so far as licensing cases are concerned, to which my lion. Friend refers, was not common, and that where it exists it usually extends only to the preparation of formal notices by the Justices' clerk. Upon the general question, the conclusion at which the Attorney General and I arrived was, that the practical harm done by the existing system is so small, and the difficulties in the way of making any change so great, that it was not desirable to propose any legislation on the subject. To this view I must adhere, while there are many other subjects on which the necessity for legislation is both clearer and more urgent.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has considered a statement on behalf of those commissary clerks in Scotland who are paid by fees as to the injurious effect of Clause 13 of the Finance Bill upon their emoluments; and whether the Government propose to amend the clause so as to avoid the injustice, either by raising the proposed scale of fees, or lowering the proposed limit of value of the estates to which the fee of 15s. shall apply; and, if not, whether the Treasury propose to obtain statutory power to grant compensation for loss of fees in such cases, as was done in similar circumstances by the 12th section of "The Revenue, Friendly Societies, and National Debt Act, 1882"?

The statement has received consideration. The Amendments to Clause 13, which will have the effect of confining personal applications to officers of Inland Revenue to estates of £500 gross, will greatly modify the effect of this clause upon the emoluments of clerks. If, however, those emoluments, or those of the Probate Registrars in Ireland, who are paid by fees, are injuriously affected by the proposal, the Treasury will be prepared to compensate them, after the precedent of the Act of 1882, mentioned in the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of Volunteers who have served more than 20 years, but whose service has not been continuous and does not come within paragraph 6 of the Army Order relating to the grant of a medal; and whether he can see his way to grant such medals in cases where it can be proved that there has been a service of over 20 years, though not continuous?

A Circular is about to be issued which will allow, under certain specified circumstances, a break in the continuity of service.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the question of granting decorations to Volunteers whose service, though sufficient and continuous, expired before the end of last year?

I have answered several questions on that subject. I do not see my way to accede to that proposal.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to recent disparaging suggestions as to the management of the Listowel Poor Law Union, whether he is aware that, at the close of the last financial year, on the 25th of March, 1894, the Guardians had to credit of their bank account £1,941 7s. 10d., and assets outstanding to the value of £4,000, and whether, at the date in question, all substantial debts of the Union had been discharged, including a sum of £500 due for seed rate by the Glinn Union, lately incorporated with Listowel; and that the Guardians have still kept to their credit a sum of over £1,000, although the sum of £690, balance of seed rate due by the Glin Union, has been withdrawn from their account by sealed order; and whether the increase of charge for indoor and outdoor relief is reasonably accounted for by a moderate improvement in the dietary, by pressure of poverty, owing to agricultural depression, by the number of evictions in the district, and by the effect of the emigration of young people upon the proportion of the aged in the Home population?

The clerk of the Listowel Board of Guardians reports that on the 25th of March last the Guardians had a credit balance at bank of £1,941 7s. 10d., and that the total assets outstanding amounted to£1,883 11s. 10d. At the close of the half-year to the 25th of March last, the outstanding seed rate amounted to £1,189 17s. 4d., nearly £1,000 of which were due by the divisions transferred from the late Glinn Union, but of which about one-half only is recoverable, and there being at that date £690 12s. 10d. due to the Board of Works, the outstanding seed rate cannot be considered an asset. A sum of £500 was paid to the Board of Works on the 20th of February on account of seed loan for the transferred electoral divisions, but all the substantial debts of the Union had not on March 25th last been discharged, there being due to Union officers, contractors, and others £740 which, if then paid, would reduce the credit balance to £1,200. After payment on the 30th of April of £690, balance of seed rate due by the Glinn Union, the Guardians had to their credit at bank £1,062, and at the present time the credit balance stands at £310. The dietary of the inmates of the workhouse has been improved of late years, and this to some extent has caused an increase of charge. No opinion is expressed as to the other causes alleged in the concluding paragraph.

I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that proposals have been made to the Transvaal Government under which a monopoly for the importation into the Transvaal of cyanide of potassium and all compounds of cyanogen, now for some years largely in use in that country for the extraction of gold from minerals, would be granted to a single individual or Company, and under which a very heavy tax could be imposed on the gold industry, in which some millions of British capital has now been invested; if he is aware that much of this capital has been invested under the impression that the means used in this industry, such as mercury and cyanide of potassium, were subject in their use only to the conditions existing up to now; and if the Colonial Office will use its friendly offices with the Transvaal Government to prevent this great injury to the gold industry of the Transvaal in the interests of the industry and of British investors, who own the greater part?

I have no official knowledge of the facts set forth in the first two paragraphs of the hon. Member's question. But I recognise the importance of the matter as affecting the mining industry, and upon a proper representation from the interests affected being made, Her Majesty's Government would be prepared favourably to consider the question of making a friendly representation to the Government of the South African Republic should the facts seem to warrant such a course.

I will take steps to lay the facts before the hon. Gentleman. Will he, in the meantime, prevent any further action in the direction indicated in the question?

We can do nothing until we have the facts before us.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether an agreement between the Post Office and the National Telephone Company has been in preparation for two years; and whether, in view of the fact that he has stated on various occasions during the last year that the agreement would be shortly laid before the House of Commons, he can now state definitely before what date the agreement will be produced? At the same time, I may ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the effect of the long delay in concluding the agreement between the Post Office and the National Telephone Company, and the refusal of the Post Office in the meantime to grant licences to Municipalities, has been to enable the National Telephone Company to increase their monopoly and place themselves in a better position than those Municipalities which wish to obtain licences; and if he can state how many applications for local licences from Municipalities have been received since it was decided to purchase the trunk lines?

May I at the same time ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the terms of the agreement with the National Telephone Company have yet been settled; and, if not, are they likely to be settled soon; and whether he is aware that the great delay in settling the agreement is extremely inconvenient to Local Authorities who are desirous to deal with the question of telephonic communication?

I wish also to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question of which I have given him private notice, i.e., whether he will take care that in any agreement between himself and the National Telephone Company provisions are made that in the event of the purchase by the State of the Company's property only the market value of the stock and plant actually belonging to the Company shall be paid as consideration money, without taking into account prospective profits, or any claim for goodwill, or any similar claim?

Since I answered a question on this subject on the 30th of April last further points of considerable complexity have arisen in connection with the settlement of the details of the agreement. While I very much regret the delay which has occurred—a delay which is in no respect due to any absence of effort on my part to bring it to a successful conclusion—I cannot think that it has enabled the National Telephone Company either to increase their monopoly or to place themselves in a better position. In fact, the hon. Member for the Southern Division of Westmoreland appears to forget that the National Telephone Company only enjoy a temporary licence which terminates in 1911, and that every month that passes must therefore have the effect of reducing the value of their goodwill in the business. I hope the hon. Member will not press me to answer the latter part of his question, as I do not think it would be desirable in the public interest to reply to it at the present moment. With reference to the question of which the hon. Member for Canterbury has given me private notice, I must point out that the agreement now being negotiated is simply intended to give effect to the arrangement made by the late Government for the purchase of the Company's Trunk wires—an arrangement which did not contemplate any interference with the general conditions of the existing licence.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will arrange for the appointment of a female Inspector, resident in Ireland, for factories and workshops in that country, in the same manner end under the same conditions as those of England and Scotland?

I must refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to a similar question on the 4th of this mouth; but in illustration of what I then stated as to the attention that was being, and would continue to he, given by the lady Inspectors to Irish industries, I may mention that one of them spent most of her time in April and May in Ireland, and conducted prosecutions in Dublin, Belfast, and Kingstown.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Davis and Pocock, who were summoned on the 2nd ultimo, before the Gloucester County Bench, for cruelty to a bullock by driving it for three miles to market when lame from a fracture of a leg; whether he is aware that it was proved by the medical witnesses that the animal was suffering pain and was unfit to be so driven; whether in holding that the act of the defendants did not constitute cruelty, and in dismissing the case the Justices committed an error of law; and whether he will direct the case to be disposed of in accordance with the evidence?

My attention has been drawn to the case to which my hon. Friend refers, and I find that although the animal which was the subject of the charge of cruelty was lame from a fracture of the leg, the fracture had taken place more than a year ago. Evidence was given to the effect that the animal was suffering pain and was unfit to be driven; but there was counter-evidence to show that though from this old fracture the animal limped badly, he did not suffer pain, and could be driven without cruelty. The Justices held that a case of cruelty was not made out against the defendants, and dismissed it accordingly. In this, whether their decision was right or wrong in point of fact, they committed no error in law; and I have no power to give any instructions for the re-hearing of the case.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the circumstances relating to the dismissal of Mr. W. S. Aldis from the post of Professor of Mathematics in the University of Auckland; whether he is aware that, although Mr. Aldis was appointed to the Professorship under agreement with the New Zealand Government, by the terms of which six months' notice in writing was to be given for the termination thereof, he has been dismissed from his Professorship without any proper notice, and, in fact, without any notice from the said Government; and that the Colonial Government has refused to consider Mr. Aldis's claim to be either reinstated or compensated; and whether Her Majesty's Government has addressed any remonstrance to the Government of New Zealand respecting the matter?

We have received no official information on the subject, as the matter is not one that would come under our cognizance; nor is it one with which, as I understand, the Government of New Zealand have anything to do.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is not an isolated case, and that other gentlemen have been similarly treated?

Is it not a fact that Professor Aldis was not appointed by the New Zealand Government at all, but by the Auckland University College, which is an independent corporation in no way under the control of the New Zealand Government; and also is it not a fact that the Governing Body of the Auckland University College was acting within the terms of the agreement in terminating the Professor's engagement?

I have no facts before me which will enable me to answer the latter part of the hon. Member's question. The statement in the first part of the question is perfectly true.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if any, and what, person was appointed by the Court in the bankruptcy of Mr. W. E. Warren, late of Iping Paper Mills, Sussex, to represent the debtor, in accordance with Rule 271 of the Bankruptcy Acts 1883 and 1890, he being at the time detained under certificates as a person of unsound mind; if the debtor, or any person duly appointed as his representative, was present at any public examination during the bankruptcy proceedings; and, if not, whether any order was made under Section 2 of "The Bankruptcy Act, 1890," to dispense with his public examination, and upon whose application was such order made; and if the Board will allow the debtor or his solicitor to see the accounts transmitted to the Board by the Trustee under Rule 289, and any Report on his accounts which may be made to the Board before his release is granted under Section 82 of "The Bankruptcy Act, 1883"?

No person was appointed by the Court under Rule 271 of the Bankruptcy Rules to represent Mr. W. E. Warren. No public examination has been held. The sitting of the Court for the public examination was fixed for the 20th of August, 1891, but was adjourned sine die in consequence of the debtor's non-appearance. The examination has not been dispensed with under Section 2 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1890. If the debtor desires to obtain his discharge it will be necessary that the examination should be proceeded with in the usual way. The accounts transmitted by the Trustee under Rule 289 are by Statute open to the inspection of any creditor or of the bankrupt, or of any person interested. There is no statutory right to inspect Reports prepared under Section 82 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, but when the Report is prepared in the present case it will be considered whether an inspection of it can be permitted.

May I ask whether the estate of an alleged lunatic is liable to be administered in bankruptcy without any person being appointed to represent his interest, or without any communication to the Judge in bankruptcy or the Lord Chancellor?

The question does not arise out of my answer, and I think notice should be given of it. It does not appear from the circumstances of the case, so far as I can ascertain, that any injustice has been done.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can now say whether the rate of compensation or compassionate allowance in the case of persons killed or injured in the Government employment at the Ordnance Factories can be increased by the Treasury without further previous Parliamentary sanction; and what are the powers of the Treasury in this respect?

said: The powers of the Treasury are laid down, as regards compensation or compassionate allowances in the case of person killed or injured at the Ordnance Factories, in the Warrant of September, 1887, framed in pursuance of Section 1 of the Superannuation Act of that year, and those powers cannot be extended without further legislation.

But is it not the fact that in the case of the allowances made to the widows of the men killed at Waltham, the Treasury can, without going to Parliament for extra powers, increase the sum?

Only within the limits of the Warrant.

How is it that these widows only got pensions of 5s. or 6s. a week instead of a sum equal to the pay received by their husbands?

That question should be addressed to the War Office.

Has the maximum under the Warrant been allowed to the relatives of the men who were killed recently at Waltham Abbey?

I cannot say.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government will endeavour to come to an understanding with the French Government that French Forces shall not advance into the Equatorial Provinces during the discussion of the French claims with regard to the Congo Treaty of the 12th of May? I should also like to ask the hon. Baronet if he can inform the House as to the present position of the French forces?

I can give no information on the last point without notice. I cannot add anything to previous statements with reference to the pending discussion between the two Governments.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a protest has been addressed by Her Majesty's Government to the Transvaal Government against the commandeering of British subjects for service in the Transvaal; and, if so, what reply has been given by the Transvaal Government to this protest?

At the same time, I may ask the hon. Gentleman whether there is any further reply as yet from the Government of the South African Republic in regard to the commandeering of British subjects for military service against certain native tribes?

The Acting High Commissioner for South Africa has addressed a friendly representation to the Government of the South African Republic on this subject, and we are in further communication with Sir II. Loch on the subject. No reply has as yet been received from the South African Republic.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether ho is aware that the Local Government Board for Ireland adopted last year a reduced scale for payment to clerks of Unions and poor rate collectors for their services in connection with the Registration Acts; that payments subsequently made to these officials under the former scale for work done while the former scale was in force were surcharged by the auditors of the Local Government Board in different Unions; that the County Court Judge for Monaghan has decreed a Board of Poor Law Guardians for the full amount under the old scale in a test case brought before him by the Union officials interested; whether, since this decision, lawsuits in- volving costs to the rates have been taken by these officials against several Boards of Guardians for payment under the old scale, and the Local Government Board, in a letter dated 2nd of June last, have refused to give the Tobercurry Board of Guardians any definite advice in the matter; and whether he is prepared to recommend that the Local Government Hoard shall take competent legal advice as to the exact scope and legality of their orders in this matter, and advise the Board of Guardians accordingly, so as to save litigation with their officials and consequent loss to the rates in various Unions in Ireland?

The facts are generally as stated in the first and second paragraphs. The Local Government Board were advised that the Order of the 23rd of September last applied to all payments made after that date, and that the facts that the services in question, or some of them, were performed before that date made no difference. In recent cases the Board have suggested to Boards of Guardians that they should act as advised by their own solicitor or counsel before making payments for duties discharged prior to the issue of the recent Order, and this course was followed in the Tobercurry case referred to. In the absence of a decision of a High Court on the point, the Board have deemed it expedient to suggest this course to the Guardians in every case in which they are called upon to give a decision. The Board's advice to the Guardians will of course influence the auditors in their action.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take any steps to get a decision of the High Court on the subject? The Guardians are in this dilemma: If they pay on the old scale they are surcharged, and if under the new they are decreed by the County Court Judge.

I will inquire if it be possible.

In the absence of the hon. Member for the Walthamstow Division of Essex, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if he will explain why the lauding of American cattle by means of lighters from large vessels is sanctioned at the Foreign Animals Wharf at Deptford, but a similar practice is not recognised in the case of the Foreign Animals Wharf at Gosport; and whether there is any legal objection to such landing by means of lighters taking place at Gosport?

The Foreign Animals Wharf at Deptford is part of the Port of London, and the vessel from which animals are transhipped for lauding there has practically arrived at her destination, and is merely proceeding to some other wharf in the same port to complete the work of unloading and for disinfection or cleansing. In the case of Gosport, what is proposed is that ocean steamers should be detained in the Channel for the purpose of transferring cattle into lighters before proceeding to the port of destination, or else that animals should be allowed to be transhipped in the Thames and taken round to Gosport in small vessels for landing there. There is, therefore, an essential difference between the two cases, and although I am not prepared to say that there is any absolute legal objection to either of the arrangements proposed, I believe that they would be inconsistent with the maintenance of that reasonable security against the introduction of diseased animals which the law is designed to afford.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that at Gosport the vessels are to be detained in the Channel and the animals transhipped?

There is no place at Gosport at which the animals can be landed from these large vessels.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that in several of the country districts served from Wexford Post Office the first delivery of letters does not take place until 1.30 p.m.; if such late deliveries are due to the irregular working of the mail train between Dublin and Wexford; whether the said train very often takes 11 hours and a-half to do a journey of about 92 miles; and if steps will be taken to remedy this unsatisfactory state of affairs?

It is true that in: a portion of the outlying district of Wexford the delivery is as late as the hour mentioned, and the lateness is in a measure due to the irregular working of the mail train. My Department is in communication with the Railway Company on the subject, and I understand that the Company are taking steps for securing a punctual working of the train.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that, in spite of the efforts of the Chief Commissioner of Police, considerable dissatisfaction continues to prevail among the constables in the Metropolitan Police Force with respect to the quality and comfort of the boots issued to them, and which are supplied by contract; and whether he will consult with the Chief Commissioner as to the advisability of giving to the members of the Force the option of being supplied with contract boots or receiving in lieu the contract price with permission to supply themselves with boots in accordance with the regulation pattern?

The Commissioner is unaware that dissatisfaction prevails amongst the constables in respect to the quality and comfort of the boots issued to them. The boots are of very good quality, and men are given the fullest opportunity of fitting themselves, and even of changing the boots after they have been worn if they prove uncomfortable. The present contract was entered into in 1892, and has still three years to run. It would be impossible for men to supply themselves with boots of the same quality if they received money allowance equivalent to the contract price; but the Commissioner will consider this point before the expiration of the contract, and will report to the Secretary of State.

Is the Home Secretary prepared to relieve the Imperial Parliament from the consideration of the boots of the Metropolitan Police by handing over the police to the control of the London County Council?

Who is responsible for the contract—the Chief Commissioner of Police or the Director of Army Clothing Contracts?

The Director of Army Clothing Contracts has nothing to do with this matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether there is any limit as to the number of years for which a Government contract can be put out; and, if so, what that limit is?

I am not aware of any such limit.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is a fact that the negotiations between England and Spain, concerning the Spanish Tariff, are now broken off, and that all goods on order at present in England must be delivered in Spain prior to the 1st of July, or be subject to higher rates; if so, whether the Government will take any steps which are in their power to obtain an extension of time for the numerous English manufacturers who will, under present circumstances, suffer severely, owing to the shortness of notice, and so enable them to execute their orders before any change is made?

We are not aware of any foundation for this rumour. The negotiations are not broken off, and Her Majesty's Government have no reason to suppose that any change in the tariff rates to which British goods are now subject is impending.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the trial of certain Tollesbury fishermen and dredgers for alleged piracy, at the Essex Assizes, and to the observations of the Judge (Mr. Justice Day) that if the Legislature had time to devote to such objects as the preservation of the public oyster fishery, he thought they would do well to make removals of cultch, to the destruction of such fisheries, unlawful; and, if so, whether he would take steps to obtain a suspension of the Twelve o'Clock Rule, if the present opposition continues to the Bill now before this House having that object, so that it might become law this Session?

As I have blocked the Bill referred to, I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks it is reasonable, seeing the Government have taken the whole time of the House, that I should allow a Bill which involves the destruction of the trade of my constituents, the fishermen and owners of the Tollesbury oyster fisheries, to pass entirely without discussion?

Yes, Sir; I have seen the newspaper account of the proceedings referred to by my hon. Friend. I venture to hope, having regard to those proceedings and to the widespread demand for the Bill referred to, that the hon. and gallant Member for South-East Essex will withdraw his opposition to the Bill. He is, I believe, the only Member in the House who opposes it, and who delays legislation which the other Members for Essex and the Fisheries Committees all over England are anxious to obtain, and which would be very much in the interests of the consumers of oysters. But I am not at present able to state what course it will be proper to take with regard to the suggestion of my hon. Friend. In reply to the question of the hon. and gallant Member for South-East Essex, I cannot admit that the description he has given of the Bill is correct. On the contrary, it is far from being so. Still, that, of course, is a matter which involves argument.

Is it not the case that in the last Parliament the Government took non-contentious Bills as the first Order of the Day?

I beg to inform the right hon. Gentleman that I cannot withdraw my opposition.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is able to state what foundation there is for the statement published in the Press, to the effect that Turkish functionaries, while on a tax collecting tour through Tripoli, found that the Arab citidal at Kassar-Bugardin, in Tripoli, near to the Frontiers of Tunis, had been occupied, and was then in occu- pation by French troops, and that the inhabitants of Ghadames and Ghat have been brought into a great state of alarm by this occupation of Turkish territory, and, fearing a further French invasion, have demanded of the Turkish Governor General the adoption of defensive measures to provide against any such invasion; and whether Her Majesty's Government are able to say, or if not now able to say whether they will ascertain, if the Turkish Government has made to the French Government any protest or remonstrance against the occupation by France of Turkish territory in Tripoli?

We have no information as to the proceedings referred to. In 1890 the Porte formally reserved its rights over the hinterland of Tripoli, but we have no reason to believe that it has recently made any protest or remonstrance to the French Government.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to various statements in the newspapers from time to time with regard to alleged want of proper supervision at the various centres during the period of local preliminary examinations for the Army, whereby certain candidates were favoured above others, and that teachers and others interested in the success of candidates were aid to have been on the committee of supervision; and whether, in regard to the Army Sandhurst Examination to be held at local centres, he intends to take steps to exclude from the conduct of the examination all local schoolmasters or tutors whose pupils may be under examination?

Local preliminary examinations for the Army are conducted by the Civil Service Commissioners, who inform me that the superintending examiners have in no case any connection, as schoolmasters or tutors, with the centres where the competitions take place. The superintendence and conduct of the examinations are exclusively vested in these examiners.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the serious statements made in the Army and Navy Gazette of June 2?

I am afraid I have not seen the paper in question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take any steps in the matter?

The matter is under the control of the Civil Service Examiners.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether pensions to the wives and children of members of the Indian Civil Service, which are provided from funds contributed partly by the members of that Service, and partly by the Government of India, are property liable to aggregation within the meaning of Section 2 (d) of the Finance Bill, or will be taken into consideration in estimating the value of the estate of deceased members of that Service?

I have not been able to look into the provisions of the Indian Pensions Act, but primâ facie I should say that such pensions will fall within Sub-section (d) of Clause 2 of the Bill.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can inform the House when the final dividend will be paid to the depositors in the Cardiff Savings Bank, and what the amount of the final dividend will be; whether those who refused the composition offered in the first instance will be paid on the full amount due, or only on the same terms as the other depositors who accepted 17s. 6d. in the £1; and whether he can state to the House the total cost of the liquidation, inclusive of all law expenses, to date?

I am informed by the Official Liquidator that he is now, with the sanction of the Court, engaged in distributing the first and final dividend to the depositors in the Cardiff Savings Bank. The dividend amounts to 3s. in the £1 on the balance found by the Court to be due to each depositor. Each depositor will be paid on the full amount so found to be due to him. The remuneration and costs are fixed and allowed by the Court. The total amount cannot yet be stated, but is expected to come out at about £9,600.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can lay upon the Table an Estimate of the annual payment to the Exchequer which will be required from Ireland, should the Finance Bill become law, on account of the new Estate Duties from the estates of deceased occupying tenants on the principal value of the tenant-right of their holdings?

I can make no such estimate. The probate statistics for Ireland do not show separately the amount derived from probate on the tenant-right of occupying tenants, which, being personalty, is at present subject to Probate Duty on the marketable value of the tenant-right. Should the Finance Bill become law it cannot possibly be taxed on a greater value. This applies to tenant occupiers. As regards tenant purchasers, in whose case the tenant-right is merged in the ownership, I may state, as there seems to be some misunderstanding, that the unpaid purchase-money will, of course, be a deduction from the value of their property before it is charged to the tax.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any idea of what the amount will come to, roughly speaking?

And can he say how, unless in those cases where the specified value of the tenant-right has been fixed by the Court, such value is to be ascertained?

I can only reply that there is no separate account of the value procurable.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in consequence of all applications for the return of Income Tax being only dealt with at Somerset House, thus causing great trouble and delay, he will give instructions for the district surveyors to grant certificates of relief and repayment in all cases where they are satisfied that the applications are bonâ fide and satisfactory?

Relief from Income Tax, by way of repayment, is directed by law to be made by the Special Commissioners, who act on the certificate of the District Commissioners. Apart from the purely legal question, there are insuperable administrative objections to surveyors of taxes being made a final court of appeal in these matters.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not give facilities to people instead of obstructing them?

If my hon. Friend will inform me what he wishes in the matter I will see if it can be done.

I only ask on behalf of the general public, because the matter is one of universal complaint throughout the country.

I can only ask my hon. Friend to send me particulars in writing showing how the public may be benefited, and I will then consider what can be done.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the heads of the Chancery and Probate Divisions of the High Court of Justice in Ireland have been consulted with reference to the provisions of Clause 13 of the Finance Bill; and, if so, what opinion they have expressed on the subject?

No official communications have passed on the subject. The Amendment proposed to Clause 13, which limits personal applications to Inland Revenue Officers to estates of £500 gross, will greatly modify the effect of the Bill, as far as it concerns the officials of the Probate Division of the High Court hi Ireland.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer—(1) whether, in addition to the ordinary Commissioners of Income Tax in Wigan, there are appointed other additional Commissioners; and, if so, how many, and what are their names; and (2) whether it would be competent for any person seeking remission from unfair taxation to appear before the Commissioners by a non-legal representative?

(1) I am informed that in the Division of Wigan there are no "Additional" Commissioners. Their duties are performed by the "General" Commissioners. (2) This is a matter which must be regarded as within the discretion of the Commissioners. I have already informed the hon. Member what is the strict legal position.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he has received any information regarding the sentence of death alleged to have been passed by the Sessions Judge of Bhagalpore upon a young lad 10 years of age; and, if so, will be lay any Papers upon the Table of the House?

I have made a full inquiry into the case, and I have read the Judgment of the High Court. The boy to whom the question refers was charged with taking a younger boy into an uninhabited house, and there robbing him and inflicting upon him grievous bodily harm. It appears that the prosecutor was wounded very severely, and was left in a state of insensibility. The High Court, in their Judgment, stated that there was no doubt that he was shockingly wounded. The case was tried before the Sessions Judge with two assessors. The Judge and one assessor were of opinion that the accused was guilty; the other assessor dissented from their verdict. Under the Indian Penal Code, the minimum penalty for an offence of this description is seven years' imprisonment, and the boy was sentenced in accordance with the Code to this punishment. But the Judge availed himself of the power conferred upon him by the Indian Reformatories Act, and commuted the penalty to that of detention for a period of seven years in a reformatory school. The boy appealed to the High Court at Calcutta, and the Judges of that Court, after a most careful consideration of all the evidence, were of opinion that it was not sufficient to justify a conviction, and they directed the release of the boy. In these circum- stances, I see no necessity for laying any Papers upon the Table of the House.

The sentence has not been carried out?

No.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the Report of the Professor of Pathology in Cambridge University, printed in The Cambridge University Reporter of the 25th of May, wherein it is stated that Professor Filehne of the University of Breslau carried on work there during the Lent and part of the Michaelmas Terms; whether that work, referred to as research work, involved experiments on living animals; whether he is aware that Professor Filehne has not been returned as having been licensed or certificated last year at Cambridge or elsewhere; whether he will state how many experiments the Professor made, and of what kind; and if there should have been a breach of the law who is responsible for it, and whether any proceedings will be taken in regard to it?

The answer to the first question is in the affirmative, but to the second that Professor Filehne did not himself perform any experiments on living animals, and it is consequently unnecessary to answer the remaining questions. Any such experiments involved in his researches were performed by duly licensed persons. I think I ought to add that the question suggests that a distinguished foreign man of science, when residing in this country as a guest, committed a breach of the law, and that his hosts connived at his doing so, and that it would be well that before such questions are put adequate inquiry should be made to ascertain that there is ground for them.

I wish to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether there is any foundation for the report that a police force has gone to Acbill Island to assist in the collection of the seed rate, and, if so, whether, under the present peculiarly distressing circumstances, he will advise the Lord Lieutenant to exercise his power to postpone the repayment of the loan?

It is true that application has been made for a force of police to protect the rate collector while engaged collecting some £400 of arrears of rate due in Achill Island under the Seed Loans Act. Under the circumstances, in view of the distressed condition of the island, I have felt it my duty to advise the Lord Lieutenant that the time for the repayment of those arrears should be extended until September next, and therefore I presume the collector engaged by the Board of Guardians will not go any further. In any case, the police will not assist in the collection by protecting the collector.