I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, if Her Majesty's Government has recently assented to an increase in the duty levied upon British goods entering Turkey and Japan; and, in such case, what representations were made to their Imperial Majesties the Sultan and Mikado in favour of British exports receiving equal treatment to that accorded in the United Kingdom to Turkish and Japanese exports?

No new Treaty has been concluded with Turkey, and the duties remain as they were. The Tariff annexed to the Treaty recently concluded with Japan, provides for a higher rate of duty on certain British goods entering Japan. Under Clause I of the Protocol attached to the Treaty, the new Tariff might, in certain circumstances, have come into operation a month after the Ratifications of the Treaty had been exchanged. It is, however, subject to the provisions of Article 23 of the Treaty of 1858, by which it is expressly stipulated that Her Majesty's Government and British subjects will be allowed free and equal participation—

"in all privileges, immunities and advantages that may have been or may be hereafter granted by His Majesty the Tycoon of Japan to the Government or subjects of any other nation;"

and the Provisions of the new Tariff are therefore necessarily suspended until the revision of the Treaties between Japan and other Powers has been effected. British commerce with Japan is also fully protected by Articles 5 and 15 of the New Treaty against the imposition of any duties heavier than those levied on the commerce of any other State. The New Treaty with Japan was negotiated upon the same principles as are observed in dealing with other civilised Powers, and the Tariff of Duties arranged under it will not compare unfavourably with those of most European nations. No useful purpose would have been served by arguing with the Japanese Govern- ment in favour of the principles of Free Trade.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, if any, and if so how much, of the money taken last year for the increase of the Navy has been spent in Ireland; and whether, in the event of any more being taken, it is proposed to spend any more; and if so within what time.

I assume that the question relates to increased ship-building. Tenders were invited in Ireland for the hulls and machinery of two first-class battleships and six large cruisers, and for the machinery of three other first-class battleships, to be built in the dockyards; but only one tender of those above-named could be accepted (on account of price) for the machinery of a first-class battleship. The money spent last year and liabilities incurred amount to £98,702. It cannot be stated how much more will be spent or in what time; but tenders for any new work will be invited from Irish firms considered competent to undertake it.

Will you say how much of the money was expended at Haulbowline?

That is not in the question at all.

Would it not be possible to give work at Haul-bowline in the construction of certain classes of ships, such as small cruisers?

I hardly think it is so, but it is a question to which I cannot give a definite answer.

How much of the money has been spent in actual work and how much in superintendence?

I have not the information that would enable me to answer that question.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he will consider the advisability of appointing a Government Inspector in addition to the three Inspectors of Fisheries for Ireland, whose special duty it will be to attend to the mackerel-curing industry, in view of its large and growing importance.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a memorial from the mackerel-curers of the Counties of Cork and Kerry, praying for the appointment of an inspector, specially fitted to judge the quality of the fish and the barrel, and with power to affix the Government brand, at a small fee per barrel to cover the costs of salary and expenses, as practised with good results in the herring-curing trade in Scotland; and, further, praying that efforts should be made to induce the Government of Russia and the United States to reduce their import duty on cured mackerel to that on cured herrings, the duty on cured herrings being 7s. per barrel in Russia and 4s. 2d. per barrel in the United States, whereas the duty on cured mackerel is 28s. per barrel in the former country and 6s. 3d. per barrel in the latter; and whether, in view of the fact that Irish mackerel-curers are at present practically dependent on American markets for the sale of their produce, and the desirability of encouraging this growing Irish industry, he will grant the prayers contained in this memorial?

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a memorial from an association of mackerel-curers in the Counties of Cork and Kerry, pressing for the appointment of an additional fishery inspector in Ireland with the special function of looking after the mackerel-curing industry, which is fast increasing in that country; whether it would be possible, as suggested by the memorialists, to make the office self-supporting by establishing a Government brand for cured mackerel, at a small fee, similar to the herring brand in Scotland; and whether the Government propose to adopt, the suggestion of the memorialists? Also, whether he has received a memorial from an association of mackerel-curers in the counties of Cork and Kerry, asking that the Government should cause representations to be made to the Governments of the United States and of Russia respectively, with a view to the reduction by these coun- tries of the import duty on cured mackerel; whether he is aware that the import duty on cured mackerel in the United States is 6s. 3d. per barrel, and in Russia 28s. per barrel, as against an import duty in these countries on herrings of 4s. 2d. per barrel and 7s. per barrel respectively; and whether he will cause representations to be made in the sense suggested?

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether, in view of the importance of the mackerel fishery in Ireland, he will consider the advisability of appointing a Government Inspector, whose sole duty it will be to attend to the mackerel-curing industry; and, whether he will establish a Government brand similar to the herring brand in Scotland?

In answering the questions of the hon. Bart. (Sir Thomas Esmonde), it will be convenient that I should at the same time answer four other questions on the paper relating to the same subject. In December last I received the memorial to which reference is made, from the Irish Mackerel Fisheries Association; and the reply given to that memorial stated that the question of establishing a Government brand for Irish-cured mackerel had been engaging the attention of the Government, but that the matter was one requiring very careful enquiry, and that legislation would be necessary to provide for the branding fee, and the punishment of any infringement of the brand. It was also stated that the question of import duties of cured mackerel exported to Russia and the United States would form an element in the general question, which is manifestly one requiring mature consideration. The Inspectors of Fisheries believe that the reason for the lower tariff in Russia on herrings, as compared with mackerel, is that herrings form a staple article of diet among the Russian peasantry. As regards the United States, the mackerel fishery forms an important industry for American fishermen, and a high protective duty is imposed on foreign imports of mackerel to that country. With regard to the suggested appointment of an Inspector, in addition to the three Inspectors of Fisheries, the Government are of opinion that three Inspectors are ample for the work of inspection under the Irish Fishery Department. One of these Inspectors is able to devote a considerable portion of his time to the work of fishery development of the Congested Districts Board, and in the performance of his duties he is constantly moving about the vicinity of the mackerel fisheries.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can state when the works at the proposed new quays at Glasha and Tullig (County Kerry) will be commenced?

Tenders for these works are to be lodged with the Congested Disticts Board before the 19th instant, and arrangements will be made to start the works as soon as possible after that date.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(l)whether the Trades Warders in Mountjoy Prison, who work at their trades from 6 a.m. to 6.15 p.m. for eight months of the year, and from 6.45 a.m. to 6.15 p.m. for four months, are required, in addition, to do duty as evening guards for three days in the week; (2) whether these men have also to do ordinary duty as warders on Sundays, and only get leave every third Sunday; and, (3) whether some are required to do night duty as well?

The General Prisons Board informs me that none of the Trades Warders, in this prison, work at their trades for the length of time mentioned in the question. Work commences at about 7 a.m. in Summer, and 7.45 a.m. in Winter, and ceases at 5.45 p.m. all the year round. Two hours of the interval are allotted for meals, and half-an-hour for serving the food to the prisoners. In addition, all indoor trades get an hour's exercise daily. The Trades Warders are required to do duty as evening guards, amounting on an average to about six hours a week. The reply to the second and third paragraphs is in the affirmative. Night duty consists of about five hours once in every twelve nights, and those who perform it are allowed half the following day off duty.

asked whether it was not the fact that, while other Warders were at liberty, the Trades Warders were either at work or engaged in supervision, and whether the right hon. Gentleman did not think that men who were continuously on duty for so many hours ought not to be relieved from night duty?

was not sure whether the Trades Warders got the same hours of exercise as others, but he would find out. He could assure the hon. Member that the duties of the Warders were not excessive or prolonged.

asked whether a Return could be laid on the table, showing the number of hours worked by the Warders.

said, he would consider the possibility of giving a Return, but the information it would contain would be the same as that given in the answer to the question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) how many labourers' cottages have been erected under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts in the Enniskillen Union up to the present time; (2) whether he is aware that an application from Thomas Love, Mally-lusty, Blacklion, and Michael M' Loughlin, Carrentrenall, Blacklion, had been refused, and that one of those men immediately afterwards was evicted by his landlord, an ex-officio Guardian, though the rent was fully paid up, and was compelled to seek a habitation with his young family in an outhouse for several days and nights; and, (3) whether he will make inquiries into these cases, and generally with a view of having the Labourers Acts enforced in the Enniskillen Union?

(1) No cottages have been erected in Enniskillen Union. (2) Representations on behalf of the persons named were refused by the Guardians, on the ground that there was a number of vacant houses in the locality available for their accommodation. Statements to the effect mentioned in the, concluding part of the second paragraph were made to the Local Government Board by one of these persons. (3) The Local Government Board are always ready to direct an inquiry where a primâ-facie case for such action on their part is established; but having regard to the reports made to the Guardians by the Medical Officer of Health and the Sanitary Sub-officer as to the existence of vacant houses in the district this case did not appear' to the Board to be one in which any advantage would result from such an inquiry.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a sentence, passed by Mr. Denman at the South-western Police Court in September last, on F. D. Summers, of seven days' imprisonment with hard labour for non-compliance with a vaccination order; whether he is aware that F. D. Summers was, contrary to law, subjected to the hard labour regulations while in prison; and, whether he will direct compensation to be made to him for this illegal punishment.

I have communicated with the Magistrate and the Prison Commissioners, and am informed by them that Summers was neither sentenced to hard labour nor subjected to hard labour.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has seen the statement given in evidence by Governor Andrews, of Cork Gaol, at the inquest on John Twiss, executed on last Saturday, 9th instant, that magisterial investigations, at which a Resident Magistrate, the Crown Solicitor, and Inspector Irwin were present, were held in Cork Gaol, and evidence taken in reference to the crime of which Twiss was subsequently convicted, and that at those investigations the prisoner was not professionally represented; and whether such investigations are according to custom; and, if so, whether he will take measures to put an end to such proceedings?

In answer to my hon. . Friend, when further evidence against a prisoner is obtained after he has been committed for trial, it is, I am informed, the usual and proper course, and a course taken in favour of the prisoner, to take that evidence in his presence, lest he should be taken by surprise by its production at the trial. The evidence in this case was that of a man named Reidy, but was not used at the trial. The prisoner was not professionally represented when the witness's evidence was given in the prison. Copies of the evidence taken were, on the same day, forwarded to the solicitor acting for Twiss, and that is the answer to the question on the Paper. As, however, the lion. Member mentioned the name of District Inspector Irwin in the question, perhaps I may be allowed to take this opportunity of referring to certain allegations that have been made affecting him. It has been alleged that he paid money to Twiss to swear against a certain person or persons; that he told him that he had "a rope round his neck;" and that he had shown Twiss photographs of certain persons. I have received to-day from Inspector Irwin a Report, in which he stated explicitly that he never at any time, either in court or in prison, offered any money to Twiss to swear against any person or persons, or for any other purpose whatever, during the time that he was employed in the investigation of the case, or at any other time. He never mentioned to Twiss that he had a rope round his neck, or at any time showed him photographs of persons.

reminded the Chief Secretary that he had made no insinuations against Irwin. Did the right hon. Gentleman approve of the practice in criminal cases—where a man's life might be in jeopardy—of additional evidence being taken in a prison, away from all publicity, against a prisoner who had no professional aid, whether in his presence or not? Why was it not given in open Court or reserved for the trial? Under what Statute was evidence taken in this way?

replied, that he could not say under what Act of Parliament the procedure was based. But he had informed himself about the practice, which was in favour of the prisoner. When new evidence was found against a prisoner after he had been committed for trial, two courses might be taken before the trial took place—the depositions might be taken outside the prison and communicated afterwards to the prisoner, or the evidence of witnesses might be taken by a Magistrate in prison in the presence of the accused. This was to prevent new evidence being sprung upon the prisoner at the trial.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman thought it was in favour of a prisoner, when he had a solicitor to defend him, that additional evidence should be taken against him in a prison and behind that solicitor's back?

said, this question was not in Order, as it discussed what was in favour of the prisoner or not, which hardly arose here.

then asked whether notice was given to Twiss's solicitor that the additional evidence would be taken, and whether he had an opportunity of using it for prisoner's defence if it was not in favour of the prosecution?

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman had considered the effect of witnesses being examined in the walls of a prison?

said, it did not matter what the effect on witnesses was, he was right in assuming that the practice of taking the evidence in prison and in the prisoner's presence was in favour of the prisoner. Notice that the evidence would be taken was given to the prisoner's solicitor; but the witness was not produced at the trial, and the evidence was not used for any purpose.

pointed out that perfectly inadmissible evidence might be given against a prisoner who had not the protection of a legal adviser.

said, he had discussed the matter thoroughly with those who were competent to advise him, and he was convinced that the course taken was not injurious to the prisoner.

asked if representatives of the Press were at liberty to attend the taking of evidence in prisons?

I am afraid not; but I cannot say.

was proceeding to put another question, when—

Order, order !

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that troops can easily be moved to Londonderry from head-quarters at Enniskillen, where there is already sufficient accommodation, he will reconsider his intention of proposing a large outlay of public money for providing barracks for the head-quarters in Londonderry?

This question was determined some time ago, when it was decided on strong military grounds to transfer the troops to Londonderry. There is no idea of reconsidering it.

asked whether it was decided on military or public grounds that the head-quarters should be at Londonderry? So many of our troops were merely engaged in police duties.

From the information supplied to me it appears it was on military grounds.

added that the transfer would have been carried out before, but for the difficulty of obtaining a site.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether the Department has received numerous complaints from business houses respecting the conditions laid down in the Post Office Guide, page 27, for the return of inclosed post cards and invoices, &c.; and whether he can see his way to remove the complaints that have been made against the present arrangements?

The complaints from business houses of the new regulations for the return of undelivered post cards, invoices, &c., had not been numerous. It takes time for regulations of this kind to become fully known, although previous notices are issued by the Department; but the inconvenience which has arisen from senders being unaware of the change is diminishing day by day. The regulations affect only packets prepaid ½d., and such packets being in themselves unremunerative, it is only reasonable that senders should pay the cost of returning any which they desire to recover in case of their non-delivery.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what proportion of the additional officers and men of the Royal Marines voted in the Estimates for 1894–5, have up to the present date been appointed to, or enlisted in, the corps.

Five officers, and 485 warrant officers, non-commissioned officers, and privates; total 490, out of 500 additional voted.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he sees his way to recommend payment out of the public funds to deep sea fishermen who are continually, at great personal risk, saving the lives of the crews of sinking or abandoned vessels, and who are also at pecuniary loss in having to leave the fishing grounds and bring their vessels into port with those saved; whether, in the case of the crews of foreign vessels being saved, the claims for compensation or reward will be brought before their Governments; and whether a special medal or decoration, could be instituted?

Payments out of the Mercantile Marine Fund are made by the Board of Trade to deep sea fishermen, under Section 677 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, when they have saved life at sea from British vessels at great personal risk. The Board also grant medals in many cases, and, as the House is aware, Her Majesty, whose sympathy with acts of courage and chivalry has been so often displayed, has instituted the decoration of the Albert Medal for conspicuous cases of gallantry in saving life at sea. In the case of the crews of foreign vessels being saved, the circumstances are usually brought under the notice of foreign Governments by their local Consuls, and rewards are often bestowed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the police of Liverpool are preventing the unemployed of the City from meeting on Corporation ground, near the Exchange, which is a common place of public meeting; and that members of the police force have been guilty of violence towards the unemployed whilst preventing them holding their meetings at the place referred to; and whether the police have instructions to prohibit such meetings; and, if so, by whom have such instructions been given?

I am informed that the piece, of ground to which the hon. Member alludes is not Corporation property, but a public highway, where to hold a meeting would cause great public inconvenience, and would seriously impede the business of the port. The Lord Mayor informs me that meetings are now, and always have been, allowed to be held on a piece of land situated in the central part of the town, and which, although Corporate property, has not been dedicated to the public as a highway. The reports furnished to me go to show that the police acted justifiably in preventing the meeting, and that no undue severity was used by them in the execution of their duty. But I have no authority in matters of this kind over the Liverpool police, who are under the control of the Watch Committee of the City.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if, in the recent arrangements with France in West Africa, steps have been taken to prevent the duties and restrictions imposed upon British trade by that Republic in Indo-China and elsewhere?

The negotiations were, from the nature of the case, limited to certain questions connected with West Africa. The commercial arrangements which have been entered into will be found in a Parliamentary Paper which is on the point of being issued.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether Alderman Edmund Walsh, who has been selected by the Lord Lieutenant to fill the office of High Sheriff of the City of Cork, is the same Alderman Walsh as was challenged by the Crown and ordered to stand aside, when the jury was being sworn at the recent Assizes, for the trial of Eugéne Keeffe on the capital charge?

Alderman Edmund Walsh was ordered by the Crown Solicitor to stand aside in the case referred to. It would be without precedent and inexpedient to mention the reasons which weighed with the Crown Solicitor in the exercise of his discretion. As to his having been selected by the Lord Lieutenant to fill the office of High Sheriff, I may observe that he was named first on the list of three persons nominated under the Statute by the City of Cork Town Council to fill the office of High Sheriff, and the Lord Lieutenant took the first name on the list.

I should like to know whether this Gentleman, in the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, is not competent to find a verdict in accordance with the evidence, and in accordance with the oath, and whether this same gentleman will now have the framing of the jury panel for the City of Cork?

For many reasons, I understand, a juryman on the panel may be ordered to stand aside. There may be certain questions of prejudice or local connection, and so forth, which may render it undesirable that a person should serve, but I do not know whether those were the reasons which actuated the Crown Solicitor in the present case. Those reasons may be quite inconsistent with the reasons which may actuate the Town Council of the City of Cork in nominating Sheriffs.

Is there any precedent for allowing a gentleman to serve on a jury panel of which he is in charge?

Is it not a fact that a High Sheriff is, by his office, precluded from serving on a jury?

Is it not a fact that this gentleman was challenged by the Crown about the middle of December, and that he did not enter on his office as High Sheriff till January 1st?

I must ask that that question be put down. I have answered all that is material to the point raised in the question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works, whether he can state how far the buildings of the New National Portrait Gallery have advanced towards completion; what further steps are necessary before the pictures can be moved from Bethnal Green; and, whether it is the intention of the Government to put down a Vote in the Estimates in connection with the preparation of the Gallery for the reception of the pictures.

The building has so far advanced that the architect is now of opinion that he will be able to hand it over to the Board of Works at the end of April, or beginning of May. The two top floors are now practically finished, and it will be possible to begin the removal of the pictures from Bethnal Green in the course of next month. The hanging could be carried out during the time that the lower floors are being finished, so that the galleries might be opened to the public in June. A sum of £400 has been provided in the Estimate for Public Buildings for the next financial year to cover the cost of completing the fixtures and furniture of the new building. The cost of removing the pictures from Bethnal Green will be borne by the Science and Art Department.

On behalf of the Member for Deptford (Mr. Darling): I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty, whether men employed by Government in the Deptford Victualling Yard on general labourers' work are paid 20s. a week (for a week of 48 hours' work); and whether a contractor employing men in the same yard on the same class of work is compelled by the terms of his contract with the Government to pay to his men 6½d. per hour, being 26s. for 48 hours' work?

Labourers employed by the Admiralty at Deptford are paid a fixed rate of 20s. a week. Contractors' labourers are paid by the hour, at the rate stated in the question. It should be borne in mind that Admiralty-hired labourers have privileges not enjoyed by contractors' men—namely, holidays with pay; hurt pay, and medical attendance when hurt; gratuities under certain conditions on discharge; and, above all, more constant employment without the expense of frequent removals.

Is it not a fact that the privileges referred to are only estimated to amount in value to 1s. 6d. a week?

I do not know, but I will give the hon. Member an opportunity of ascertaining their value if he wishes.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, (1) whether any charge is made for printing stamps on private envelopes or postal wrappers, if the total value of the stamps is £10; (2) whether he is aware that at present the charge for printing private post cards is 2s. 6d. per quire, or £2. 10s. per ream; and that the actual cost of this printing does not exceed 2d. to 3d. per quire, or 3s. to 5s. per ream; and (3) whether he will extend to private post cards the same regulations and charges as for postal wrappers and private envelopes referred to in the first question?

The answer to the first paragraph of my hon. Friend's question is, No. The answer to the second is, Yes; except that the actual cost is considerably higher than the price mentioned in the question. As regards the third paragraph, I must point out that its adoption would not only necessitate additions to the establishment at Somerset House, for which I see no justification, but would also demand additional space, which it is impossible to provide. My hon. Friend's question shows that very considerable facilities are already afforded to private individuals by the Inland Revenue Authorities; and, for the reasons given, I cannot hold out any hope of increasing them. I need not remind my hon. Friend that it is always open to the private purchaser to avoid the charge in question by stamping his own cards with adhesive stamps.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether it is a rule of the Post Office that post-masterships are to be given only to those who have been previously employed in the service; whether this rule is rigidly applicable to post offices which are Crown Offices; whether Maryborough (Queen's County) Post Office is a Crown office; and, whether Mr. Fennell, recently appointed as postmaster to that office, had any previous connection with the Postal Service; if so, what was the nature of the connection; and, if not, why was the rule above referred to departed from in his case.

Crown Offices are simply offices that are the property of the Department and have really nothing to do with what I understand to be the object of the hon. Member's question. Consequent upon contemplated alterations which would have reduced the Telegraph work at Maryborough, the salary was reduced provisionally from £100 to £90—this being below the amount at which persons already in the service are as a rule appointed; and it was under these circumstances that the appointment was conferred on Mr. Fennell, who was unconnected with the Service, and who was strongly recommended.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, is he aware the trustees of the Bantry Estate have, by claiming a right to the foreshore, prevented the erection of a boat slip at Trafrask, and that a number of the Tenants of said Estate have been thrown out of employment, and are in a state of destitution; and, if so, what steps the Congested Districts Board and the Board of Trade purpose taking in the matter?

The works at the place mentioned were suspended for the reason stated, but it is expected that the difficulty will very shortly be removed and the works resumed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, having regard to the evidence given at the public inquiry held in Ennis on 8th June, 1888, by Mr. J. O'Meara, Assistant Commissioner on Market Rights and Tolls, and also to the Petition presented to His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant by the Town Commissioners of Ennis on the 22nd May last, praying for an immediate inquiry into the right, if any, of Lord Leconfield to levy tolls, and to the reply given by the Lords Justices of Ireland, the Government will bring in a Bill enabling the Town Commissioners of Ennis to acquire the right of levying tolls and establishing markets, on such terms and conditions as may be considered equitable and just?

I have already informed the hon. Gentleman that the validity of Lord Leconfield's Patent to the Customs and Tolls of Ennis came before a Jury in 1847, that evidence was then given on behalf of the Crown and the Patentee, and that there was a disagreement of the Jury. No proceeding has since been instituted to impeach the Patent, and there is no evidence forthcoming for the purpose. I can only again add that whatever may be the opinion as to the necessity for general legislation, the Government do not propose to introduce a Bill dealing with any one particular place.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, whether the Commissioners of Woods and Forests have made any experimental plantation in Wales; whether they have made inquiry with regard to the desirability of further afforesting Crown land in Wales; and, whether they intend to take the necessary steps to afforest any part of the lands over which they have control?

The Commissioner of Woods informs me that he has just completed a plantation of five acres on a Crown Farm in Merioneth-shire principally for the purpose of affording shelter. Last autumn he visited certain wastes of the Crown Lordship of Denbigh with a view to decide whether planting could be carried out with success. The Common Rights existing over these wastes presented difficulties which he discussed with the parties interested. He proposes to visit this and other districts in the coming spring, but it is necessary to bear in mind that the Commissioner of Woods has no control over these waste lands that would enable him to appropriate any portion of them for planting unless the common rights existing over those parts were extinguished.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether it has been brought to his notice that Mr. Quinlivan, recently school teacher to the Stradbally (Queen's County) National School, has been dismissed from his post by the Manager, the Rev. Mr. Brennan, P.P., without any cause assigned, and that the Rev. Mr. Brennan took forcible possession of the school by breaking in the door; whether the police were present on the occasion; and, if so, for what reason and by whose directions were they present; whether he is aware that Mr. Quinlivan, relying on the recent resolution of the Bishops at Maynooth, that an appeal would lie to the Bishop of the Diocese in all such cases as above, did appeal to the Bishop, the Most Rev. Dr. Lynch, and the coadjutor Bishop, the Most Rev. Dr. Comerford, the latter of whom replied that he could not interfere, and the former did not reply at all; and, whether he will cause an inquiry into this case?

The National Education Board inform me that in 1892 the School referred to was reported as in a very unsatisfactory state, both as to discipline and order of the school and the efficiency of the instruction. In November of that year the teacher, Mr. Quinlivan, was severely reprimanded by the Commissioners. A similar report upon the school was made in 1893, and the attention of the Manager, the Revd. Mr. Brennan, having been drawn to the state of affairs, he gave the teacher three months' notice of removal. The Manager, however, did not carry out his intention of removing the teacher at the end of this period, but extended to him further time, and subsequently gave him a final three months' notice, which expired in November last. The police were not asked to remain in the neighbourhood on the occasion of the breaking open the door of the school, but they were requested to be in the neighbourhood when the new teacher opened the school about a month afterwards. The case does not appear to be one calling for further inquiry.

I wish to ask whether it is not a fact that Mr. Brennan tried to get him another school in the neighbourhood, and, whether the right lion. Gentleman in the proposed legislation which he has foreshadowed, will take care that such autocratic power shall not be left in the hands of school managers?

Is it a fact that this teacher's case was so bad that the other teachers in the school refused to have anything to do with him?

was understood to say that he did not remember ever having promised legislation on the subject.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, is he aware that Catholic employés in the Telegraph Department, Dublin, have been deprived by the present Controller of a privilege heretofore enjoyed, of a time allowance from the prescribed hours of attendance for the purpose of hearing Mass on Sundays and holy days of their Church, and whether he will give directions that such privilege be restored?

Post Office servants who are allowed to absent themselves from duty for the purpose of performing their religious devotions on week-days are required to make up the time thus lost to the Department at some other part of the day. Established officers employed on Sundays are paid at special overtime rates, and are, therefore, only paid for the actual hours in which they are employed.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question in any sense. It is whether a privilege of attending Mass without loss of pay has been taken away by the present Controller, and whether the custom existing for ten years has been recently abrogated?

The privilege was no doubt allowed, but it never received sanction from headquarters. The change was made when all Sunday work was ordered to be paid for.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the privilege had existed for ten years; that the Catholics are the only people who suffer by the change, and that grave dissatisfaction exists in regard to the change?

I cannot say how long it had existed, but I can say that Catholics are treated exactly on the same footing as every other denomination in the service.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if he will lay upon the Table of the House a Copy of any Instructions that have been issued with a view to check the importation of foreign fruit marked fraudulently as English fruit?

said, that so far as the Board of Customs was concerned no special instructions had been issued regarding the importation of foreign fruit, but such importations were subject to the general instructions issued in connection with the prohibitory sections of the Merchandise Marks Act of 1887.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if his attention has been drawn to the resolution passed at the recent Presentment Sessions in Ennis calling on the Government to relieve the county Clare of the cost of extra police; and, whether, in view of the peaceable condition of Clare, he will take steps to carry out the desire of this resolution?

said, he had seen the resolution passed at the Presentment Sessions at Ennis. A reduction of the extra force of constabulary for Clare by 25 men had been decided upon, and this would be equivalent to a relief from taxation of about£800 per annum.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he proposes to lay this Bill for providing light railways shortly upon the Table of the House?

I hope to introduce the Bill at the earliest opportunity I can find.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what provision is made on board troopships for saving life in the event of shipwreck or collision?

said, the only troopship in commission, the Malabar, had boat accommodation for 1,245 men in light marching order without packs, and could therefore accommodate in boats on an emergency all the numbers she carries. Transports which are merchant ships adapted to carry troops are governed, as regards boat accommodation, by a scale according to tonnage. This scale is the maximum laid down by the Board of Trade under the Merchant Shipping (Life-saving Appliances) Act, 1888. They are also obliged to carry life-belts, so that, with the boats, every man can be supported in the water on an emergency.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many men there are to each horse in the British cavalry; whether it is the fact that each cavalry regiment only averages 300 horses, as against 672 in the French cavalry, 662 in the German cavalry, 935 in the Austrian, and 855 in the Russian; and, whether he will consider the advisability during the present year of low prices and agricultural depression of making increased purchases of horses for the Army?

In India the British cavalry have 114 men to 100 horses, in the colonies and Egypt 132 men to 100 horses, and at home 157 men to 100 horses. The percentage of dismounted men is necessarily greater at home than abroad, because regiments at home receive and train their own recruits. With the present establishments for cavalry regiments the military authorities do not desire to increase the number of horses, as a proportion of dismounted men is a necessity. The average number of horses with a British cavalry regiment is 388. As to the figures quoted by the hon. Member for foreign countries, I would only say that the number of horses must, of course, bear proportion to the number of men, which varies in different countries.

asked the right hon. Gentleman if there was not great difficulty in getting undocked horses?

said, that this subject did not arise out of the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury why Clause 11 (as to sub-letting and payment of wages at the current rate), in the contract for the Parliamentary Debates, contains no provision as to the payment of a penalty in case the Controller shall be of opinion that it has been broken; and, whether he will consult the Law Officers of the Crown with a view to framing a definite and enforceable form of contract, against sub-letting and for the payment of wages at the current rate, to be inserted in all Government contracts?

Clause 13 of the contract already imposes a penalty for the breach of any of its conditions in the shape of an immediate forfeiture of the contract. In addition to this the tenderers were expressly warned that the Controller would "be compelled to consider the question of removing the names of any firms who may fail to comply with the spirit of the resolution from the list of those allowed to undertake work for the Department." As regards the last part of the hon. Member's question, he is no doubt aware that the resolution was aimed against the abuse, arising from sub-letting.

May I ask if, in giving this contract, the Treasury were aware of the fact that the present contractors intended to sub-let part of the contract?

The Treasury were not aware of that fact. To do it is not contrary to the contract.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks it is fair to all the other firms who took the trouble to tender for this contract that the most vital provision should be departed from in the case of this particular firm that got the contract?

In reply to that question, I may state that the Committee which sat upon the question a few years ago passed a resolution in favour of allowing the persons who tendered for "Hansard" to obtain their reports in the best way they could, and, therefore, it was not thought necessary to lay down any rule against sub-letting the reports.

I am sorry to press the right hon. Gentleman, but this is a very important point indeed; I would ask him if the recommendations of the Select Committee did not deal with the point as to taking reports from newspapers. This case of sub-letting deals with the employment of a special staff. Is it not the case that all the firms, with the single exception of this firm that got the contract, tendered on the basis that they would be unable to enter into any sub-letting whatever, and is it not the case that this firm which thus got the contract has departed altogether from the provisions of the tender, and has been allowed to enter into a contract for sub-letting?

I was not aware that it was the intention of this contractor to obtain the reports in the way in which he is said to have done, but it has always been allowed to the contractors to obtain the reports in the best way they could. There is nothing in the contract to prohibit it or to say that they should employ a staff of reporters of their own, or that they should employ reporters in any other way.

What does the clause in the contract mean, then?

The clause against sub-contracting is only in regard to the printing, and there is nothing about the reporting.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman how these reports are being obtained and what the sub-contract is? (Cries of "Order"!") I daresay other hon. Members know, but I do not.

I can inform my hon. Friend that they are obtained, I believe, through the means of The Times reporters. The Times reports, I understand, are very good reports, almost the best reports to be obtained, and I do not know that there is any great objection to it.

Were not eight or nine reporters previously engaged to furnish these reports, and are they not now, some of them, paid only a couple of pounds a week?

Am I to understand that the reports of the Irish Members will in future be taken by The Times reporters?

The Times reporters, as I understand will take the report of each gentleman's speech in full, and these reports in extenso, will be sent to the editor of Hansard, who will curtail those speeches to the proper length required?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will consent to the Return relating to Irish Poor Law Expenditure on the Paper for this day?

There will be no objection to the proposed Return. But I think it only right to explain to my hon. Friend that the information required can only be obtained from clerks of Unions, and that the preparation of the Return will take a considerable time.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when the Return, moved on the 23rd August, 1894, as to Borough and County Magistrates, and that of 24th August, as to remuneration of Magistrates' Clerks, will be issued; and, what is the cause of the long delay?

The Return as to Borough and County Magistrates has been prepared during the Recess, and is now being printed. It was presented in dummy yesterday, and will be issued as soon as possible. The Return as to remuneration of Magistrates' Clerks was only moved for on the last day but one of last Session, and, therefore, was not presented in dummy before the rising of the House. It was presented on the 7th instant, and ordered by the House to be printed on the 8th, and will no doubt be issued shortly.

I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty, whether the Admiralty will consider the case of the hired men in Her Majesty's Dockyards, who, if they are placed upon the establishment, are not allowed to count for pension the time they may have served as hired men, although in many cases this time amounts to many years?

As I explained to the hon. Member last Session, the Regulations governing the award of pensions are common to all those employed in the service of the Crown, and are based upon the Superannuation Acts, and the Treasury Minutes issued under their authority. It is not in the power of the Admiralty alone to act in the direction suggested in the question.

said he should call attention to the matter on the Navy Estimates.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he has received a protest from the inhabitants of the Island of Coll complaining that the division of the Wards for the purposes of the Local Government Board has been made without due consideration having been given to the number of electors, and against the wishes of a large part of the population; and whether he will investigate the matter and endeavour to remedy the grievance complained of?

A protest was forwarded to the Local Government Board for Scotland, who, after inquiry, informed the complainers on the 21st of January that the Board had no power to interfere with the action of the County Council, but that, if they were dissatisfied, the proper course was for them to make a representation to the County Council, who alone have power to make any alteration in the Wards that have been fixed. I do not know whether any such representation has been made. Parliament having vested full discretion in the County Council, the responsibility for the division of the Parish into Wards must rest with that Body.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Asylum Board of Control have as yet decided on the site of the new Londonderry Asylum?

A site has, I understand, been offered for the new asylum, which is considered suitable provided satisfactory arrangements can be made for the water supply.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether it is true that a Memorial sent by the Customs Outport Clerks to the Board of Customs in January, 1892, and to the Lords of the Treasury on the 17th of May, 1892, still remains unanswered; whether he can give any explanation of the delay; and when the Memorialists may expect a reply?

I cannot trace any Memorial of the date mentioned, but a Memorial dated January, 1893, and presumed to be the one in question, was originally addressed to the Board of Customs, and was subsequently sent by the clerks direct to the Treasury. The subject of the Memorial has involved questions of consideration between the Board of Customs and the Treasury, the settlement of which has been unavoidably delayed, partly owing to the changes in the Board. I can assure the hon. Member that there shall be no unnecessary delay in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that large numbers of Civil Bills in Ejectments are served by persons other than Civil Bill Officers, with the result that large numbers of tenants are charged fees in excess of those allowed by Law; whether the judicial statistics are in part founded upon Returns made by Civil Bill Officers as to the cases in which Ejectments are served, Returns necessarily erroneous to the extent of ejectments not served by them; and whether he will consider the desirability of obtaining an Order in Council amending the practice with regard to the service of Ejectments?

My attention has been called to this matter by a Memorial received from Civil Bill Officers of Donegal and Londonderry. I am advised that—(1.) Processes in Ejectment or Replevin may be served by other persons than Civil Bill Officers. Other Civil Bills must be served by Civil Bill Officers. This is regulated by Section 15 of 14 and 15 Vic. Cap. 57, and His Excellency has no power to interfere. (2.) A table in the Judicial Statistics shows the number of Ejectments, Replevins, and other Civil Bills served in each year as shown in Returns furnished by Civil Bill Officers. This Return is necessarily incomplete, as regards Ejectments and Replevins, and there is no means of obtaining a complete Return of Ejectments served by persons other than Civil Bill Officers. Steps will be taken in future issues of the Judicial Statistics to obviate any misunderstanding on this point by amending the heading of the table. (3.) The matter being thus one which is regulated by Statute, my hon. Friend will see that it cannot be interfered with by the Lord Lieutenant or the Privy Council.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will lay upon the Table a copy of the Report of the proceedings at the inquiry directed by him into the administration of St. John's Industrial School, Walthamstow, and of the Report of the Inspector thereon, together with the terms of any decision arrived at by the Home Secretary with reference to it?

There is no objection to laying on the Table the Report of the Commissioner and the letter subsequently written to the managers by the direction of the Secretary of State.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has received a largely and influentially signed Petition to the Queen from the inhabitants of Guernsey, praying for the release of the Rev. S. Harry, who has been sentenced by a minority of the Royal Court of Guernsey to six months' imprisonment, he having inadvertently performed an illegal marriage service; and what action he proposes to take thereon?

said, he had received a Petition on behalf of the Rev. S. Harry. He had communicated with the Lieutenant-Governor of Guernsey, and was now waiting for a Report which had been promised from the Royal Court upon the case and the Petition. He had also called for a medical report as to Mr. Harry's health.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign. Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government have yet come to a decision with regard to the validity of Roman Catholic claims for compensation arising out of events in Uganda which occurred during the Government of that district by the British East Africa Company; and whether, in case such claims have been sustained, they are being considered in relation to any payment which may have to be made to the British East Africa Company

said, that the question of Roman Catholic claims formed part of the general negotiations with France about pending questions in Africa, and no settlement had been come to.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India, whether his attention has been drawn to the remarks concerning the recruiting of coolies in Bengal, made by Mr. Toynbee, Commissioner of Bhagalpore Division, and published in the Calcutta Gazette of the 3rd October last, in which he gave many instances of criminal complaints, made in the Damka district, with reference to coolie recruiting, and also of cases of abduction of women and children for a similar purpose in Deoghur, and of the forcible carrying off of youths in Godda district; and, whether, in view of the constant and apparently unavoidable abuses to which the present system of recruiting coolies for the tea plantations of Assam, &c., gives rise, he will consult the Government of India, with a view of gradually abrogating these special laws, and leave tea planters in India to obtain coolies like other employers of labour, in the open market, and tinder ordinary conditions?

I have seen the remarks to which my hon. Friend refers, and I find that they have also received the attention of the local authorities. I know that the Government of India are most anxious to gradually abrogate the special law for Assam, and that their recent Amendments of the Act were framed with a view to pave the way for a system of absolutely free migration. I will, however, again call their attention to this subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether a Departmental Committee has recently been appointed to further consider the subject of riots during labour disputes; if so, what was the composition of the Committee; whether it has issued a Report; and, will he lay a copy of the Report upon the Table of the House?

The Committee to which my hon. Friend refers dealt with riots generally, not especially with riots occurring during labour disputes. The Report has been published by the Stationery Office, and will be presented to Parliament.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, with reference to the statement in his decision refusing the application of Skelmorlie to have a separate Parish Council, that it would be in direct opposition to recent legislative precedents; would he state to what recent legislative precedents he referred; whether, seeing that under the Local Government Act of 1894 he has recently obtained power to give Parish Councils to parishes situated similarly to Skelmorlie, he will reconsider his decision; and, whether, as he had been informed that Skelmorlie was a parish situated partly in one county and partly in another before he directed an inquiry to be held, what steps he proposes to take to relieve the inhabitants of the unnecessary expense thus incurred.

Section 49 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889, is the precedent which I had more particularly in view. The Boundary Commissioners who were constituted by that Act were enjoined to frame orders dealing with parishes so that each parish—

''If the Commissioners shall in the whole circumstances of the case deem it necessary or expedient, may be within a single county."

I am informed that whereas there were 64 civil parishes in two or more counties in 1888, there are now only seven. I think the decision in the case of Skelmorlie, on the evidence produced at the inquiry, was a right decision. The order has been gazetted, and any representation made in the course of the statutory 40 days will be carefully considered before it is confirmed. I have no power to relieve authorities appearing at an inquiry of any expenses which they may incur.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works how much money the Government propose to ask out of the public taxes of Great Britain and Ireland for the purpose of erecting a statue to Oliver Cromwell; and, whether he will undertake, when the Estimates come on, to afford an opportunity to the House to express an opinion on the expenditure?

The sum proposed to be taken in the votes of Parliament for 1895–96 is an instalment of £500. I am unable as yet to give any further information. When the Estimates come on full opportunity will of course be afforded for an expression of opinion by the House.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the vacancies in the Board of Commissioners of National Education have yet been filled?

As my hon. Friend knows, the National Board consists of 20 members, 10 of whom are Catholics and ten of whom are Protestant. There were three vacancies on the Board, two for Catholics and one for a Protestant. Of the two Roman Catholic vacancies, one seat has been accepted by Dr. Walsh, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, and the Protestant seat has been accepted by Lord Plunkett, the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin. The other Catholic seat has been accepted by Mr. Harrington, of Cork.

Are we to understand that the Chief Secretary has appointed to the Board of National Education the principal opponent of the system of national education in Ireland?

That is a question which ought not to be put in that form.

Is it not a matter of notoriety that Dr. Walsh, the Archbishop of Dublin, is the strongest and most persistent opponent of the mixed system of education in Ireland?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin is the principal opponent of Catholicity in Ireland?

I submit that there is not the time for discussing the matter raised by the hon. Member for South Tyrone. I may say, however, that our object in trying to secure the services of these two distinguished men, was to have the highest representative authorities on the Board, of the communions that are interested.

With reference to the statement that Dr. Walsh is an opponent of the system of mixed education, I wish to ask the Chief Secretary whether it is not a fact that the clergy of the arch-diocese of Dublin, who are under the ecclesiastical control of Dr. Walsh, are the managers of schools under the National Board?

Yes; I think that is so.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Bill of Senator Morgan for the construction of a ship canal by the United States Government from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans, through the State of Nicaragua, was passed by the Senate of the United States of America on the 25th ult., and that the Bill is now before the House of Representatives; whether he is aware that Senator Morgan, who is Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, during his speech in favour of the Bill, stated that no foreign Government had raised any objection to the Bill; whether, inasmuch as the question of the construction of the Nicaragua Canal is one of great importance to British shipowners, owning, as they collectively do, two-thirds of the tonnage of the world, Her Majesty's Government will cause urgent representations to be made to the United States Government against any provisions in Senator Morgan's Bill which are detrimental to the interests of British shipping; and whether Her Majesty's Government will consider the propriety of urging upon the United States Government the importance of the creation of a Joint Commission, British and American, to take up and deal with the construction of the proposed Nicaragua Canal and its status when built?

The answer to the first two paragraphs is in the affirmative. It is not usual to make representations against Bills not promoted by the Government which are under discussion in the Legislature of a foreign country. Her Majesty's Government consider that such a canal as the proposed Nicaragua canal should be under International control, and whatever steps may be desirable will be taken to advance this view, but we have no reason to suppose that the United States Government will not maintain their Treaty engagements.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any working men had been appointed Justices of the Peace in Ireland; and, if so, how many?

If the expression "working men" means artizans or daily labourers, none have been placed in the Commission for counties. There have, however, been instances in which working farmers have been appointed to the Commission. The Lord Chancellor will consider each application on its merits. Borough appointments are not made by him.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether, having regard to the importance of obtaining the fullest disclosure of the truth as to events in Armenia, steps will be taken by the Foreign Office to secure the rights of British subjects to visit all parts of the Turkish Empire under the provisions of the Capitulalations of 1875 or otherwise?

The right of foreigners to visit all parts of the Turkish Empire under the provisions of the Capitulations would not appear to affect the power claimed by every independent State of refusing to admit foreigners or allow them to travel when their presence may be considered by it to be contrary to the public interest or dangerous to order. It has, however, been pointed out to the Porte that the movements of unoffending British travellers should not be interfered with.

asked whether the answer referred to the whole of Asia Minor or only to the villages of Susan.

said it referred to the whole of Asia Minor.

And to newspaper correspondents

said he had already intimated in his answer that each independent State claimed the right to a certain discretion as to whether newspaper correspondents should be admitted or not.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he will place upon the Table of the House within a day or two Returns showing the earnings of the different telephone trunk wires for the past three years which he proposes to buy from the Telephone Companies, the price he intends to pay for them, and copies of the Reports of the Post Office experts on their condition and value?

also asked whether the signing of the agreement would not be postponed until the question of the municipalities obtaining licences was discussed in the House?

The valuation of the trunk wires of the Telephone Companies, which is now being proceeded with, will take some time to complete. I am, therefore, not in a position to furnish the hon. Member with information on this point. I have also no accurate information with respect to the earnings of those wires.

asked whether the House would have an opportunity of discussing the question before the agreement was signed?

said that hon. Members interested in the question would have an opportunity of balloting for a day to bring it forward.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not give a distinct promise to the House last Session that hon. Members should have an opportunity of discussing the matter?

I made no promise of that kind.

asked whether the Government would give facilities to discuss the matter before the agreement was signed?

said he was not prepared to answer that question.

repeated that he made no promise that the signing of the agreement should be postponed until the question had been discussed in the House, and said he might remind the hon. Member that the agreement was in existence when he came into Office, and was not made by himself. The reason why he postponed the signing of the agreement last year was in order that the Session might be brought to a close.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, if he would state the circumstances which led to the withdrawal in the last Session of Parliament of the Government Bill for the Commutation of the Treasury Grant towards Light Railways in Ireland after it had passed the House of Commons?

The Government introduced the Bill for the Commutation of the Treasury Grants towards Light Railways in Ireland towards the end of last Session, thinking that it would be unopposed; but, on finding that it gave, rise to considerable opposition in Ireland, they determined to withdraw it and re-introduce it early this Session, in order that neither side might complain that they had not been allowed a fair opportunity of expressing their views.

asked when it was proposed to introduce the Bill.

It is intended to do some time before Easter, or as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the circumstances attending the death of Thomas Weir, an insane patient at the Holloway Sanatorium, Virginia Water, on the 30th September 1894, and to the opinion expressed by the coroner's jury that not sufficient medical supervision was exercised, and that the mechanical restraint was excessive and too long continued; and, whether he will order an Inquiry into the case?

My attention has been called to the circumstances in connection with the death of Thomas Weir, and I have given instructions for a special Inquiry to be held.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a book lately issued by Drs. Waldo and Walsh on the Bakehouse Question; and, whether, in view of the facts and conclusions therein detailed, the Government will institute an official Inquiry into the matter?

I have seen the book referred to. For some time past my attention has been given to this question. The law as to bakehouses is already very stringent, and in the Factory Bill which I hope to introduce I shall propose to strengthen some of its provisions. The evils of the present state of things arise, not so much from defects in the law as from its lax and unsystematic administration by the Local Sanitary Authorities. There is no need for any official Inquiry.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he can make any allowance for attendances on the part of children who, through the severity of the weather and the state of the roads, are, especially in the rural districts, unable to attend school at this season?

I fear that no allowance can be made on account, of lost attendances, because it is not possible to ascertain in each case the exact reason for absence, or to decide what actually constitutes inability to attend school. If allowance could be made for every day when weather was bad, the present system of giving grants on average attendance would become almost impossible. I can, however, perhaps meet the right hon. Gentleman in other ways, as many country schools at a time like this certainly need lenient treatment. In cases where schools have necessarily been closed in consequence of the severity of the weather, a proportionately smaller number of schools meetings than the 400 now required as a minimum is accepted as qualifying for the grant. But I will also instruct Her Majesty's Inspectors that, in assessing the grants, they should judge leniently schools now shortly to be inspected, whose efficiency has been temporarily impaired in consequence of irregular attendance caused by the recent inclement weather.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is the fact that the King of Ashanti has expressed a desire to send an Embassy to England, and has sent messengers down to Cape Coast Castle with this object; and, whether it is a fact that Her Majesty's Government have informed the King that such an Embassy could not be received by Her Majesty the Queen; and, if so, on what grounds was the refusal based.

The King Kumasi—we do not admit his claim to the title of King of Ashanti—has sent certain messengers to Cape Coast Castle, who have stated that their instructions are to proceed to England to see Her Majesty the Queen. The Governor of the Gold Coast Colony has been instructed to inform them that any communications from the King of Kumasi must come through the Governor; and that if the messengers proceed to England they will not be received. The grounds upon which Her Majesty's Government have based these instructions are (1) that the King of Kumasi is not a chief or ruler of sufficient importance to be allowed to send ambassadors to the Queen, and that, in accordance with custom, she can only treat with him through the Governor of the Gold Coast Colony, who is her representative; and (2) that, under any circumstances, Her Majesty could not receive a mission from a ruler who, there is good reason to believe, allows and countenances the practice of human sacrifices. I have to add that, under instructions from Her Majesty's Government, a message was sent to the King of Kumasi by the Governor some months ago requesting the King to accept a British Resident, and laying down certain conditions for the preservation of peace and the abolition of inhuman customs, but stating that his authority and independence would not be further interfered with.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, the price of Consols having risen so much above par, the deposits in the Post Office Savings Banks now earn sufficient to pay the rate of interest to depositors hitherto paid and the expenses of management; and, if not, whether it is proposed to alter the rate of interest or to meet the difficulty in some other way.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the cost per cent. of management of the Savings Banks for every £100 of deposits; what is the loss, if any, on every £100 deposited in the Savings Banks at the present price of Consols; whether he proposes to take any steps to minimise the loss, if any, to the Exchequer; and what is the increase in the amount of deposits for the months of November and December 1894, compared with the same months in the previous year?

I am informed by the National Debt Commissioners that the securities held by the National Debt Commissioners on account of deposits in Post Office Savings Banks have hitherto earned more than sufficient to pay the rate of interest to depositors in addition to the expenses of management; and though the price of Consols has risen to above par, it is not estimated that the expenses for the year to December 31, 1895, will exceed the income. But the margin would be extremely narrow, owing to the combined operation of the high price of Consols and the low interest upon Consols; and I propose to appoint a Departmental Committee to investigate this subject to see what can be done upon the matter. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Lime-house, the figures are not yet sufficiently ascertained to state the cost of management per cent. The increase of receipts in Savings Banks in the months of November and December 1894, as compared with the corresponding months in 1893, was about £730,000.

May I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he sees any objection to granting a Select Committee of this House to inquire into the rate of interest, instead of a Departmental Committee?

I think that would not be at all desirable. The matter ought to be carefully and depart-mentally examined, and I do hope that nothing will be said here or elsewhere which will raise any doubt in the mind of the public on the subject of the solvency of the Savings Bank. I have every confidence that there is no foundation for any suspicion of the kind, and nothing could be more injurious than to disseminate in the minds of people, who have no means of judging in this matter, any notion that there was any doubt or hesitation about the perfect solvency of the Bank, and its ample means of meeting its liabilities.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that Section 34, Sub-section (2) of the Finance Act, 1894, has been held by the Inland Revenue to exclude married women who are engaged in trade from the benefits granted to married women deriving incomes from any profession, employment, or vocation; whether he is aware that under this decision a married woman engaged as a typewriter gets the advantage which her sister engaged as a milliner or dressmaker does not; and whether he will take steps to remedy this inequality of treatment?

The Income Tax Act, 1842, in Section 100, draws a clear distinction between profits derived from any "trade, manufacture, adventure, or concern, in the nature of trade," upon profits derived from "professions, employments, or vocations." The relief given to married women by the Finance Act, 1894, is distinctly limited to the latter. I see no reason for making any alteration in the Act.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it was not certainly the understanding of the Committee, and the House, that in making the exemption no distinction would be made as regards the source from which married women derived their income, provided it was earned in some occupation; and is it wise to make a distinction in this way in regard to the small incomes of married women?

That matter raised in the latter question cannot be discussed in answer to a question. But as to the understanding, it was clearly in my mind that the exemption was only granted in respect of employment. The case that was specially put was that of a schoolmistress—that was the case on which the discussion turned. Therefore it was clearly in my mind that it was not intended to include women engaged in trade.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, if his Administration will take special precautions to insure that when Irish Unions buy Scotch potatoes this spring in Scotland, they will get Scotch seed grown in Scotland?

An answer on this subject was given to the hon. and gallant Member in January 1891, by the Lord Advocate of the late Government. I can only endorse his statement—that there were no special precautions which can effectively be taken to meet the case. But I can assure the hon. Member that, upon sufficient evi- dence being produced, the Criminal Authorities in Scotland will do all in their power to stop so fraudulent a practice; and I trust that the Local Authorities in Ireland will communicate any information they may have in any particular case, and I will promise that it shall be promptly attended to. The Crown Office have been asked to state whether there were any cases in 1891 of the nature referred to brought under their notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, if soldiers' balances unclaimed are advertised in any, and what, papers other than the London Gazette, and if he can make arrangements for advertising such balances from time to time in newspapers circulating in the regimental district within which soldiers whose balances are unclaimed are known to have enlisted, or in papers of more general circulation than the London Gazette?

Soldiers' unclaimed balances are only advertised in the London Gazette, and stated in full detail in the monthly Army List; and lists of those pertaining to men of each district are posted at the district head-quarters. Formerly advertisements were inserted in local newspapers, but they produced so little result in proportion to the expense that the practice was discontinued. I may remind the hon. Member that these balances, when finally unclaimed, do not go to the Exchequer, but are applied, in accordance with the Regimental Debts Act, for the benefit of widows and families of soldiers dying on service.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether he will lay upon the Table any communications that have passed between him and the Government of India, in consequence of his promise given on 16th April last year, on the subject of flogging in the Indian Army; and what steps, if any, have been taken to abolish flogging in the Indian Army, and thus remove the existing distinction in respect of liability to flogging between the Natives of India and all other of Her Majesty's soldiers, including the West India Regiments.

I addressed a despatch on this subject to the Government of India in May last, in fulfilment of my promise to which the hon. Member alludes. The question has been under consideration since then, and I believe that a despatch from the Government of India will probably arrive by next mail.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he can give the House any further information as to the projected telegraphic cable across the Pacific Ocean; and whether he can lay upon the Table any further Papers on the subject?

Discussions and negotiations are in progress in relation to this line of cable, but it would not be in the public interest to enter into a detailed statement at this moment, nor, I fear, can I give any definite undertaking as to the time at which it will be possible to lay further Papers on the Table.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, on the evidence of the police and the analysis of Professor Tichborne, the Clare Presentment Sessions rejected the claim of Colonel O'Callaghan for the loss of 14 bullocks, alleged to have been poisoned in June last; that the police proved it was impossible that the cattle could have been maliciously tampered with, and the analyst's certificate showed that they died from eating water parsnip; that Colonel O'Callaghan's agent subsequently sent to another analyst specimens from the stomachs of the cattle without sealing the jars in the presence of the police; and that the second analyst then reported a trace of arsenic; whether he is also aware that the claim for compensation is now being renewed before the Clare Grand Jury, of which Colonel O'Callaghan has frequently been a member; and will the Government, in the interests of justice, take steps to have the police represented, and their analyst in attendance, when the claim is resisted on behalf of the ratepayers.