I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade—(1) whether he is aware that silver plate imported from abroad is stamped (contrary to the spirit of the Merchandise Marks Act) with Hall-marks identical with those used for British plate, with the addition only of the letter F; (2) whether he is aware that such plate is largely bought by the public as British plate, and is also re-exported as such; (3) whether he is aware that British manufacturers have expressed their desire that foreign plate should after assay be stamped with marks quite distinct from those used on British plate; and (4) whether he will bring in a Bill to consolidate and amend existing Acts relating to Hall-marking?

All imported gold and silver plate is required by law to be assayed on importation, and, if found to be of standard quality, it is then Hall-marked in the same way as British plate, but with the addition of the letter F. The design of mark on foreign plate can hardly be said to be contrary to the spirit of the Merchandise Marks Act, as it is neither calculated to deceive, nor a false trade description, within the meaning of that Act. The Board have received no evidence that such plate is largely bought or re-exported; or that there is a general demand by manufacturers for a more distinctive marking. Any change towards a more restrictive system of marking foreign plate could not be made without consideration of our Treaty obligations with countries importing British plate. As to a Consolidation Bill, I see no prospect of bringing in such a measure at present.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India—(1) whether his attention has been called to the fact that, under existing Rules of the Bombay Civil Fund, while the widow of a deceased subscriber receives £400 a year, and each daughter £100, and any daughter who came on the fund after 1865, receives a further bonus of £1,000 on marriage, no provision is made to give extra benefits to daughters, who, coming on the Fund in middle life, at 40 years, or over, have practically no expectations of marriage; (2) whether a memorial has been submitted to him by a lady, who stated that her father died in 1890, at the age of 85, having paid subscriptions to the Fund for 63 years, and his wife, having predeceased him, left four daughters on the Fund, whose ages ranged from 62 to 45, whose prospective chances of obtaining £1,000 by marriage she stated to be nil, and complaining that, although her father had made exceptional sacrifices to the Fund these daughters are excluded from a part of its benefits; and (3) whether, as under Sections 2 and 4 of the Bombay Civil Fund Act, 1882, discretion is given to the Secretary of State to give additional benefits, if he shall deem it reasonable, he will exercise the discretion by arranging that a lady pensioner, coming on the Fund after a certain age may, by abandoning her claim to £1,000 on marriage, receive compensation in the shape of interest on that sum, to be added to her pension of —100 per annum.

The facts are as given in the hon. Member's first and second questions, but he is mistaken if he supposes, as he apparently does, that the pension of £100 to a married daughter continues after marriage. The donation of £1,000 is contingent on marriage, and the pension then ceases. An unmarried daughter has her pension during her life. As regards the third question, it was proposed to the subscribers of the Fund, before the passing of the Act of 1882, that the donations to sons on attaining majority, and to daughters on marriage, should be somewhat diminished, in order that children's pensions (including, of course, those of unmarried daughters) might be increased; but the members of the Fund declined to accept this suggestion; and it is not intended to propose any variation of the settlement which was then made, and was distinctly accepted as final.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government of the United States have made a Convention or Treaty with Russia as to the seal fisheries in the North Pacific Ocean; and, if so, whether he can lay upon the Table a copy of the Convention or Treaty?

An Agreement between the United States and Russia with regard to the fur seal fisheries in Behring Sea and the North Pacific Ocean was concluded in May last, and Her Majesty's Government learn that there is no present intention of altering or modifying it. Its chief provisions are similar to those contained in the Agreement between this country and Russia, relative to the seal fisheries, the text of which will be found in the correspondence laid before Parliament in June 1893. [Russia No. 1, 1893.]

Is the Agreement limited in point of time?

My impression is, that it remains in force until cither party gives notice of its intention to change or modify it.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board when the Vaccination Commission concluded their sittings; whether he is aware that many Boards of Guardians are delaying taking any action with regard to unvaccinated children until the Report is published; and, will he explain what is the reason of the delay?

I am informed that the Vaccination Commission have, practically concluded their evidence,, and have only their Report to consider. The delay in the conclusion of their inquiry is stated to be due to the very large amount of evidence received, and the time required to complete the investigations instituted by the Commission into the circumstances of particular outbreaks of Small-pox. I am aware that there, are cases where Boards of Guardians are delaying taking action with regard to unvaccinated children pending the publication of the Report, and I have been anxiously awaiting its issue?

May I ask whether, in view of the fact that a great number of Boards of Guardians are awaiting the Report, a circular could be sent to these Boards calling attention to the state of the law?

They have been informed of the state of the law very often; but it is very difficult to call upon them to enforce it pending the Report of the Commission.

Is it the fact that this Royal Commission was appointed seven years ago?

No, it is not quite so bad as that. I think it is about four years since it was appointed.

May 1889.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he can give any information as to the payment of the sum of 425,000 dollars which the United States Government have undertaken to pay as compensation to sealers under the general award of the Behring Sea Arbitration; and, whether steps have been taken for the appropriation of this sum in Congress before its rising early in the month of March?

The President has, in his Message to Congress, recommended that, provision be made for the prompt payment of this sum, and Her Majesty's Ambassador has reported that there is no reason to doubt that, the sum in question will be appropriated before the rising of Congress.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the sum necessary for the construction of a railway from some port on the East Coast of Africa to the Victoria Nyanza Lake will be placed on the Estimates for this year; whether he can lay upon the Table any further Papers in reference to this important subject; and, whether such Papers will include any correspondence on the rumoured proposal to joint action by Germany and Great Britain in the construction of such a railway?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer answered the first paragraph of the hon. Member's question yesterday. The answer to the last part is that there are no further Papers to lay on this subject, nor has there been any proposal for joint action with Germany.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether the minimum charge for a parcel posted to Australia is 1s. 6d. for any weight not exceeding 2 lb., as against a minimum charge of 10d. for 1 lb. to Canada, and 9d. for 1 lb. to Cape Colony; and, whether the minimum weight transmitted to the British Possessions generally is 1lb., at an average rate of 8d. or 9d.; whether, under the new agreement with the French Government, a parcel weighing 11 lb. can be sent from this country to France by post for 2s. 2d., and whether a parcel of the same weight sent to Australia would cost 8s. 3d.; and, whether, in view of the low rates charged for ocean freightage, he will take steps for a reduction in the minimum of both weight and postage in the case of parcels for Australia?

The hon. Member's information is substantially correct. Some months ago I approached the Australian Post Offices with a view to a revision of parcel postage in the direction indicated in the question; but they find the time inopportune for the sacrifice of revenue involved. The subject, however, will not be lost sight of.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether the German Postmaster General, Dr. von Stephan, has proposed the summoning of an International Postal Conference, to consider the question, of introducing a common International postage stamp; whether the proposal has been accepted; and, if so, when and where such Conference will meet; if he can state the date at which the ordinary quinquennial Conference of the Postal Union, should assemble; whether that date has been postponed; and, if so, for what reason; and, when and where the Conference will meet?

I have no reason to suppose that such a proposal has been made; with reference to certain newspaper reports on this subject, it may be opportune to mention that Dr. von Stephen strenuously opposed such a proposal at the Vienna Postal Congress of 1891; the next Postal Union Congress is to be held at Washington in 1897. It has not been postponed.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, whether he is aware that the fissures in the pier at Ballycotton, county Cork, are rapidly widening, and that the storm-wall has opened out from the pier for more than half its length; whether he is also aware that, owing to the sinking of the pier, the roadway is covered in rainy weather with large pools of water from six to eight inches deep, and that about 40 square feet of the outer end is undermined to such an extent that it will probably soon fall into the sea; and, whether, in view of the absolute necessity of this pier for the safety of the Ballycotton fishermen, steps will be taken to secure it against further dilapidation?

No doubt my hon. and gallant Friend is already aware that the Grand Jury of county Cork are responsible for maintaining the pier in question, but the Board of Works have power, in cases of emergency, to execute necessary repairs and charge the cost on the county. The pier was inspected by the Board's Assistant Engineer last December, and again last month by the Coast Guard Officer. The former found that practically no movement had occurred in the Sea and Wharf Walls since the pier had been vested in the Grand Jury in 1888; and the Coast Guard Officer reported that the pier had sustained no damage from recent storms. I am advised that nothing has occurred since to warrant the belief that the stability of the work has in any sense been endangered. What I would suggest to my hon. and gallant Friend is that the fishermen of Ballycotton should memorialise the Grand Jury of Cork to maintain the pier in a proper state.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I inspeted the pier on the 3rd of last month, and that I can vouch for the substantial accuracy of the statements in the questions? and will he endeavour to make some arrangement with the Grand Jury in the county of Cork, who have very properly declined to take over the pier in its present condition.

The pier is already vested in the Grand Jury, who are now responsible for its maintenance. My suggestion is that the fishermen should themselves apply to the Grand Jury on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether the, number of men discharged on completion of service and under Section 81 of the Army Act of 1881 was in 1893 greatly inferior to the number discharged as invalids, by purchase of their discharge, by the indulgence of a free discharge, as not likely to ever become efficient, on conviction, or for misconduct?

The number of men discharged from the Army on completion of their service and under Section 81 of the Army Act, is about double the number of those discharged on account of the other causes referred to in the question. The right hon. Baronet has apparently overlooked the men discharged on completion of their reserve service.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that while some of the steamships of the White Star and Cunard lines employed to convey the British Mails from Liverpool to New York are fast boats, others are comparatively slow, and that there is a difference of two, three, or even four days in the passage; for instance, the mails despatched from London viâ Liverpool on January 23 were delivered at the same time as those despatched from London viâ Southampton on January 26; whether vessels of other lines sailing from Southampton two or three days later than the slow or "tramp" boots from Liverpool have constantly reached New York before or side by side with the latter; whether the British Post Office pays for the conveyance of letters to New York 3s. per pound to the boats leaving Liverpool whether slow or fast, and 1s. 8d. per pound to those leaving Southampton; and whether he will arrange to despatch the mails by fast boats exclusively, irrespective of the port of departure or the company to which they belong?

Full information in regard to the various steamship services to New York is regularly furnished to the House in the Paper known as Sir John Leng's Return. The steamers carrying the two mails mentioned in the first paragraph reached New York on the same day, but information as to the arrival of the mails at the New York Post Office has not yet been received. It is the fact that, while the sea conveyance by German arid American steamers going direct from Southampton to New York is paid for at the Postal Union rate, 1s. 9½d. (not 1s. 8d.) a pound, a special rate of 3s. a pound is paid to the contractors for the British Packet Service, who are bound to despatch their steamers on fixed days and to call at Queenstown for the mails. The senders of letters can secure by special superscription the carriage of any letter by any steamer they may prefer to the mail steamer; and it is not proposed to alter the present arrangement by which letters not so superscribed are sent by the Contract Packets.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, will he explain why the Civil Bill Court Quarter Sessions of the Peace and Licensing Sessions, which were formerly held at Buncrana, where all the County Court business of the Innishowen district was transacted, have now been abolished, with the result that suitors and others have to go either to Letterkenny or Lifford, many miles distant, in order to have their cases heard; and, if inquiry will be made with a view to re-establishing the Buncrana Sessions, under 14 and 15 Vic., c. 57, s. 31?

My hon. Friend appears to have been misinformed in this matter. It is true that in 1892 certain changes were made in these Courts on the recommendation of the solicitors practising in the Lifford Division of the county; but the only effect of the changes was that the sittings should be held at Buncrana in Hilary and Michaelmas, and at Carndonagh in Trinity of each year. I shall be happy to hand a copy of the Gazette giving effect to these changes to the hon. Gentleman, if he so desire.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, if he is aware that since the passing of the Weighing of Cattle Act, 1891, some auctioneers are erecting within their cattle marts weighbridges with automatic dials, the smallest divisions of which show only quarters of hundredweights, so that the weight of cattle cannot be ascertained to a pound; and, if he will ascertain whether Inspectors of Weights and Measures can accurately apply the test for sensitiveness on a dial weigh-bridge of which the smallest division marks 28 lbs., whereas under No. 55 of the Model Regulations, 1890, the test is that 2 lbs. should move the finger of a 2-ton weigh-bridge?

I am aware that some auctioneers prefer to use dial weighbridges graduated in the manner mentioned by the hon. Member, but the testing of such machines as to sensitiveness does not rest with the Board of Trade, but with the Local Authorities who appoint the Inspectors of Weights and Measures. The test for sensitiveness could not be properly applied unless the graduations on the dial were of sufficient width to indicate the limits of sensitiveness, and the Standards Department had called the attention of some Inspectors to this test.

I beg to ask the President of the Hoard of Trade whether the contract for the conveyance of a portion of the mails between London and Paris is about to be given to a French Company; whether, to enable them to fulfil the same, the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company are to transfer the most modern portion of their fleet to the French Flag; and, whether Board of Trade Inspectors will continue to certify to the seaworthiness of the vessels in question?

I am informed by the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company that the day service of mails between London and Paris is paid for by the French Government, and that the vessels employed have always sailed under the French Flag. It appears that the existing Contract with the French Post Office will terminate next year, and that the French Government have determined to give the new one to the Northern of France Railway Company, it being a condition that the vessels employed should be built in France and owned by a French Company. The Board of Trade have no power to survey foreign vessels for passenger certificates, unless it is intended to carry passengers between places in the United Kingdom.

Do I understand that the Board of Trade will have no power to examine the vessels by which these mails are to be conveyed?

No, being French vessels, we cannot survey French vessels.

May I ask whether the Act of Parliament does not provide for a revision of the arrangements with the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company this year?

I cannot answer that, question without reference to the Statute, and in any case, it is a question for the Postmaster General.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he can now state what steps have been or will be taken in reference to the wreck of the steamship Elbe, and the danger it offers to navigation and to the property of the fishing industry?

Before the President of the Board of Trade answers that question, may I ask him whether, having regard to the statement already made that there is no public fund available for this purpose, he did not think that the object indicated in the question may be fairly left to private enterprise, and possibly a company promoted for that object?

The question of my hon. Friend invites an expression of opinion from me which perhaps it would be scarcely in order for me to give. With regard to the question on the Paper the Trinity House inform me that they are not aware that the wreck of the Elbe constitutes a danger to navigation, and that the Mercantile Marine Fund is not applicable for the purpose of clearing away obstructions to fishing. The Board of Trade have no power whatever in the matter.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not inform me last week that he had a telegram from Lowestoft stating that one of the musts of the Elbe had been seen above the water, and whether, if that were so, whether it is not a danger to navigation and to the property of the fishermen, seeing that the wreck is situated in the very heart of the fishingbeds?

What I said last week was that I had telegraphic information that the captain of a fishing craft made that statement. I did not say it was a fact, and subsequent inquiry entirely failed to discover the projecting mast.

Cannot a buoy be placed at the spot?

I have already told the hon. Member three or four times that the Board of Trade have no more power than he has in the matter.

Have the Board of Trade no control over the Trinity Board?

No, Sir; none whatever.

Don't they spend the Trinity Boards money?

No.

I beg to ask the President of the hoard of Trade if he will consider the advisability of recommending shipbuilders (or of compelling them by legislation if that course should be deemed preferable), to construct, steamers with overhanging or raking stems as formerly, inasmuch as in the event of a collision the damage sustained from a vessel so constructed is almost always confined to those parts above the water line, whereas with the present ram-shaped bows a ship run into is almost certain to sink?

I should be very unwilling to interfere with the discretion of shipbuilders or shipowners, or to offer them advice as to the construction of their vessels. I would remind the hon. Member that the question of a sloping as opposed to a straight stem was brought by a witness under the notice of the Royal Commission on Loss of Life at Sea, but the Report of that Commission did not contain any recommendation upon this point, nor in fact, any reference to it.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, what is the present position of the scheme for the establishment of a Central Welsh Board of Intermediate Education?

When this scheme was submitted to the Education Department by the Charity Commissioners last year, it was thought best, to defer its consideration until the various county schemes had all become law, as, otherwise, difficulties might have arisen with regard to the constitution of the Central hoard. These county schemes have now all become law, with the exception of that for the County of Glamorgan, against which an Appeal has been made to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. In view of the fact that several County Councils are already actively prosecuting work under the county schemes, and of the further delay which must occur before the reference to the Judicial Committee in the Glamorganshire case can be disposed of, I propose to reconsider the question whether it is desirable to delay the progress of the Central Scheme any longer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, what is the number of extra police at present stationed in the County Wexford, and their cost to the county?

There are at the present moment 11 men of an extra forcer on the strength of the, police establishment in Wexford, and the cost of these men in the county is at the rate of about £370 per annum. It has been decided to entirely abolish this extra force as soon as arrangements can be made, and, in any case, before April 1 next.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, whether provision has been made in this year's Estimate to increase the efficiency of Haulbowline Dockyard, so that it may be utilised to give the employment originally intended; whether any more training ships have been appointed for duty on the Irish coast; and whether the Naval expenditure in Ireland has been estimated in accordance with the increase of taxation and the rates expected by Irish taxpayers?

As the subject to which the question relates will be more appropriately discussed when the Estimates, which will be laid on the Table next week, are before the House, I am not prepared to anticipate this discussion in answer to a question.

Can the hon. Gentleman say on what day?

That I cannot say at present.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, what previous experience the Inspector of Lights of the Irish Lights Board had in the working of the different kinds of machinery used in Irish Lighthouses before his appointment to his present position; whether it is the case that he was a master mariner on board one of the Irish Lights Board steamers before his present appointment, where he could have gained no experience to qualify him for such appointment; and, whether it has been brought to his notice that the lighthouse keepers have to instruct him in the working of the lighting machinery when he makes his inspections?

The selection of their Officers by the Commissioners of Irish Lights is in no way under the control of the Board of Trade, but I am informed by the Commissioners that all machinery in connection with lights and fog signals is in charge, not of the Inspector of Lights, but of the Engineer. The Commissioners further inform me that the present Inspector, like his predecessor, was in command of one of their steamers, and that he held that command for 18 years before promotion to his present post.

asked whether any particular body had any authority over the Irish Lights Board?

said, the Board of Trade had some authority over the Board in question, but not in regard to this point.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman or the Government would bring in a Bill, as had been promised, to revise the constitution of the Irish Lights Board?

did not remember having made any such promise, but thought it might have been made by some one else—perhaps by the Chief Secretary.

asked upon what points had the Board of Trade any authority over the Irish Lights Board?

That is a question which I think should be put upon the Paper.

I will put one to the right hon. Gentlemen on the subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he is aware that the reserve provisions which, by an order of the Board of Trade, are required to be stored in Irish rock and island lighthouse stations on or before the 1st of October in each year, were not landed on the Slyne Head Lighthouse till the 24th of November, 1894, though the Irish Lights Commissioners sent their steamer round the Irish coasts in the month of August, 1894; and that there was plenty of room on board the steamer for the carriage of provisions; who is responsible for the disregard of the orders of the Board of Trade; and, whether he will direct an inquiry into the circumstances?

I am informed in a letter from the Commissioners of Irish Lights that it is customary for them to supply a reserve stock of provisions to rock lighthouses, before the commencement of each winter, and that these matters are regulated by them without reference to the Board of Trade, the officers of the Lighthouse service being responsible to the Commissioners for the proper discharge of their duties, with which, in the matter of the supply of reserve provisions to the Slyne Head Lighthouses, the Irish Lights Commissioners had no fault to find. In this matter the Irish Lights Commissioners are not responsible to the Board of Trade, and the Board of Trade have no power to issue such order as is referred to. I see no reason whatever for any inquiry.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, if he is aware that Surgeon Major F. Clarence Smith has been dismissed by His Excellency the Governor of Madras upon certain written charges brought against him by Mr. Robert Clegg, a member of the Indian Civil Service, stationed at Combaconum; that Surgeon Major Smith has been refused a copy of the written charges against him on which the Governor has taken action; and that in a memorial submitted to the Madras Government by Surgeon Major Smith, he complains that he has been condemned unheard, and without any knowledge of what the charges are upon which he has been dismissed; if the matter has been referred home to the Secretary of State; and, if so, what has been the result; and if he will lay upon the Table of the House, copies of all correspondence between Surgeon Major Smith and the Government of Madras, and between them and the India Office?

On the 18th of January, Surgeon Major Smith sent to the Government of Madras a memorial to the Secretary of State appealing against the decision of Madras Government in his case. The Government of Madras forwarded that memorial by the mail which arrived yesterday; the matter is therefore sub judice, and I do not think that it would be expedient for me to make any statement.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the Engine-Room Artificers in the districts of Chatham and Sheerness have been compelled to go to a particular shop or contractor for their uniforms, although such clothing is paid for by the men themselves, in violation of the Truck Acts (1 and 2 Will. IV., c. 37, s. 2, and 50 and 51 Vic., c. 46, s. 6); and, whether the Engine-Room Artificers will be permitted to purchase their own uniforms where they please, with their own money, without interference by the officials at those places; or, if not, whether the Government will supply the uniforms to the men without deductions from their pay?

asked whether these men could not receive their uniforms free?

That is a matter which requires much consideration. With regard to the question on the Paper, the local order in force up to the end of last year, that Engine-Room Artificers entered at Sheerness and Chatham should obtain their uniforms from a firm who supplied such clothing in exact conformity with Admiralty regulations, has been rescinded. Engine-Room Artificers are now allowed to purchase their uniforms where they please, but, of course, if such uniforms are found to be not of the proper service pattern, the cost of replacing the same falls upon the men.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, whether he is aware that, in consequence of the present severe state of the weather, and the state of the roads in scattered rural districts, the attendance of the children in such districts, where they are compelled to go some distance to the elementary school, is very seriously affected, as compared with urban schools; whether, notwithstanding, the register has to be marked, thereby adversely affecting the grant; and, whether he will consider the desirability of modifying the existing regulation under such special circumstances as at present exist?

I am aware of the circumstances mentioned by the hon. Member. Country schools at a time like this certainly need lenient treatment. I think, however, that the case will be adequately met by the measures I have already mentioned. In cases where schools have been, necessarily closed in consequence of the severity of the weather, a proportionately smaller number of school meetings than the 400 now required as a minimum will be accepted as qualifying for the grant; and I am issuing instructions to 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 Secretary of State for War whether one of the qualifications required from a candidate for a "Special Campaign Pension" is that he must be destitute of means of support; and, whether he can see his way to abrogate this condition, which gives a preference to the thriftless, and throw the pensions open to old soldiers who comply with all the other conditions prescribed?

The conditions under which this special compassionate pension is granted are at present under my careful consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that in the Administration Report on the Railways of India for 1893–4 there is a schedule of railways lately surveyed, at present under survey, or recently put forward for consideration, in all amounting to a mileage of 6,167; whether, during the next three years, he has authorised the construction of 2,000 miles; and whether, in view of the serious depression in the iron, coal, and other industries, and the lack of employment in this country, and the large amount of unemployed capital, the Government proposes to authorise the whole of the above mileage to be immediately constructed.

My answer to the hon. Member's first question is in the affirmative. The total mileage now under construction or sanctioned is about 2,600, of which about 1000 miles are included in the schedule to which the hon. Member refers. It is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to proceed with the construction of railways in India as rapidly as the resources of the Government of India will permit, and, at the same time, to make use of private agencies for that purpose whenever suitable terms can be arranged.

asked whether the Government could not see their way to giving an Imperial guarantee for the construction of railways in India, in the same way that an Imperial guarantee was given some years ago for the same purpose?

That is just a point to which we do not see our way.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that Her Majesty's Government, under Treaties with the Great Powers, have agreed to promote railways in Africa to develope that country, he is in a position to inform the House what steps the Government propose to take this Session in this matter?

I do not agree in the accuracy of the hon. Gentleman's premise in regard to the Brussels General Act. But I may state that as regards West Africa the construction of Railways in the West African Colonies is under careful consideration. Surveys have been made at Sierra Leone and the Gold Coast, and are now in course of execution at Lagos. If it be finally decided that railways are practicable and expedient at these places they will probably be constructed by the Colonies concerned at their own cost; and there will, therefore, be no occasion nor necessity to come to Parliament with respect to them. As regards South Africa, the House had already been informed that Her Majesty's Government arrived last year at an agreement with the British South Africa Company and the Bechuanaland Railway Company, whereby, on the completion of sections of the line of railway through the Bechuanaland Protectorate, a subsidy would be given by the Bechuanaland Government to the line, and, within certain limits of time, it rests with those Companies to commence the work. The Natal railway is being extended to Johannesburg under agreement between the Natal Government and the South African Republic; and permission has lately been given to certain gentlemen in Natal to make a railway from the Natal border into zululand.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, if his attention has been called to an official Circular recently addressed by the Chief Commissioner of Burma to the Members of the Civil Service throughout the province, remonstrating with them with regard to the practice which had become prevalent of contracting illicit alliances with Burmese women, and speaking of it as a public scandal; and, if he is able to lay a copy of the Circular upon the Table of the House?

I have heard nothing of any Circular on the subject to which my hon. Friend's question refers; but, since that question was put down, my attention has been called to a newspaper report of a speech by the Chief Commissioner with the purport of which, as there reported, I entirely agree. From this speech it would appear that he has "semi-officially" and confidentially addressed some of his officers on the subject. If it is true that such a document was issued, and that it was confidential and not official, it is not likely that it will be published either in India or in this country.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether he can now state what answer has been given by the Government of India to the memorial of Sir W. Hudson, President of the Behar Planters' Association, dated 28th January 1894, on the subject of the slaughter of kine in India; whether Mr. Arthur Rogers' scheme recommended in that memorial, for restoring friendly relations between the Mahomedans and Hindus, has been considered by the Government of India and reported on as requested by the Secretary of State in his despatch of 3lst May last; whether the Viceroy in Council has approved of Mr. Rogers' scheme, and that it has been partially introduced by two Local Governments; whether he is aware that Mr. Rogers has been dismissed from his appointment as an engineer on the Bengal and North Western Railway; and, whether he will explain the reasons for Mr. Rogers' dismissal, and will lay upon the Table of the House a memorial from Mr. Rogers in which he sets forth the facts of his case and prays for inquiry and redress?

A question similar to that of my hon. Friend was put in the Legislative Council of the Viceroy on the 25th January last. Sir Antony MacDonnell, the Member of Council in charge of the Home Department, stated in reply that Mr. Rogers' scheme, though not brought before the Government in the regular way, had been brought under their notice un-officially; that the Government of India had made no use of Mr. Rogers' remedy, and that it appeared to them to contain no proposals of a practical character which the Government of India had not adopted independently of it. I believe that Mr. Rogers was for about four years in the service of the Bengal North Western Railway Company as an Assistant Engineer and that his services have been dispensed with by that Company. In consequence of an allegation by Mr. Rogers that he had been dismissed from the service of the Railway Company through pressure alleged to have been exercised upon them by the Governments of Bengal and the North West Provinces and Oudh, I am informed by the Government of India that, so far as they are aware, the Board of the Bengal and North Western Railway Company has dispensed with Mr. Rogers' services for its own reasons, and that

"no pressure was brought upon it either by the Government of Bengal, or that of the North Western Provinces and Oudh or by the Government of India in the matter".

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he is aware that an agreement has been signed between the German Colonial Office, the German East Africa Company, and a syndicate of banking firms, for the commencement of a railway from the German East African Coast to Central Africa, the Victoria Nyanza, and Lake Tanganyika; and, whether in view of Sir Gerald Portal's statement in his Report on Uganda, that there exists in that country a demand for such articles as cotton cloths of best qualities, and that if the present system of transport is continued the demand will be supplied from German sources, and by the German route, the Government will, in the interests of British trade, undertake the construction of the railway as recommended by Sir Gerald Portal?

The construction of a railway from Tanga by a German firm has been begun, but we are not aware of any agreement such as that referred to.

asked whether, in view of the great depression existing at the present time, the Government would reconsider their determination with a view to opening up a fresh market for British trade?

said he could not promise to reconsider the answer which the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave yesterday.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether it is the fact that, while those who rescue property at sea are entitled to salvage money, there if no legal right for the recovery of any money payment in respect of the saving of life, even though the rescuers incur actual money loss in their successful efforts, often at the greatest personal risk?

Sections 544 and 545 of the Merchant Shipping Act not only provide for the payment of salvage for saving life, but lay down that such salvage, when payable, shall have priority over all other claims for salvage. But in the case of claims against owners, it has been held that a claim for life salvage can only be sustained when some portion of the property has also been salved.

asked whether the Board of Trade, in the event of property being insufficient to cover expenses had not the power to pay such sums, as might in their discretion seem fit, out of the Mercantile Marine Fund?

said that was so.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that a coroner's inquest was held a short time since on a body drawn out of the Thames at Rotherhithe, which when taken out was quite warm, and, whether the present arrangement under which payment was only made for the recovery of a dead body did not practically amount to prohibition upon attempts to save life?

That seems to relate to a different matter, but I will answer a question if the hon. Member places one on the Paper.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been directed to the statement of His Excellency the Viceroy of India, in the Debate in Council on the Indian Tariff Bill, as published at page 53 of the Indian Tariff Act Blue Book, that members of the Indian Legislative Council are only free to speak and vote in the Council for the measure they honestly think best, when that is in accordance with the "mandate" they have received from London; whether he is aware that the late Right Honourable Sir Barnes Peacock and other Authorities on Indian Constitutional Law have denounced that doctrine as an infringement of the rights and privileges of the Council; and, whether, seeing that the Secretary of State for India, in a Despatch dated 15th October, 1874, distinctly stated that the object of the instructions given to the Government of India on this subject was not to fetter the discretion which the Law has vested in the various Legislative Authorities of India, the doctrine now laid down by the Viceroy of India was sanctioned by Her Majesty's Government?

The question of the hon. Member raises the important and delicate subject of the relations between the Government of India on the one hand and the Home Government and Parliament on the other. It is impossible within the limits of an answer to deal in a satisfactory manner with this matter; I will, therefore, merely say that at the proper time I shall be prepared to main tain that the course which has been taken by Her Majesty's Government and by the Viceroy upon recent occasions is in strict accordance both with the Acts of Parliament regulating the Government of India and with the constitutional and uniform practice under those Acts. In order that the leading precedents may be known to the House, I propose to lay upon the Table the relevant portions of a Despatch of the Duke of Argyll, dated 24th November, 1870, and three I despatches of Lord Salisbury, dated, respectively, 31st March, 1874, 15th October, 1874, and 31st May, 1876, in which the relative positions of the Secretary of State and the Government of India were clearly laid down.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether he has received a copy of the Memorial of the Bombay Millowners presented to the Council of the Governor General of India, mentioned at page 24 of the Papers relating to the India Tariff Act; or of the letter of the Secretary to the Millowners' Association of Bombay, dated 10th September, 1894, mentioned at page 27; or of the Memorial and telegram from the Bombay Millowners' Association, mentioned at page 30; and, if he is in possession of copies of such documents, whether he has any objection to make them public?

The references cited in the first and second clauses of my hon. Friend's question appear to refer to the same representation from the Bombay Millowners' Association. I also have seen the telegram dated the 19th December, cited in the third clause. There is no objection to laying these Papers on the Table if they are desired.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether his attention has been called to a telegram from The Times correspondent at Calcutta, in which he says that it appears that all the mills in India except one had ceased manufacturing counts above 20s.; and, whether, under these circumstances, he still expects to collect any appreciable amount as excise duties?

I have seen the telegram, which apparently refers to the Calcutta mills output only. I have no official information on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will place upon the Table copies of the Memorials sent with Sir James Westland's Despatch of 21st March, 1894?

I have no objection to placing on the Table copies of Papers received with the Government of India Despatch of the 21st March, 1894.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give any information as to the reported rising of Natives in the Niger Protectorate; whether the Natives who made the attack on Akassa have since then threatened to attack Brass; and what preparations have been made to support the authority of Her Majesty's Commissioner, Sir Claude MacDonald?

An attack has been made on the establishment of the Royal Niger Company at Akassa by a large number of natives of Brass and other neighbouring tribes. Some of the native employés of the Company were killed. No European lives were lost, but two officers of the Company's police have been severely wounded. We have no corroboration of the reports of intended attacks on Brass, which is well garrisoned. Her Majesty's Commissioner, who has under his command an efficient police force, is supported by the presence of the Admiral commanding the West African Station with a portion of his squadron and by the forces and armed vessels of the Niger Company.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade—(1) whether his attention has been given to the statement made by Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams, on 19th March 1894, in dealing with the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, that the report of the Official Receiver suggested two distinct frauds; that the Official Receiver had delayed his report too long, the Winding-up Order having been made on 21st July 1893, and the report not having been delivered till 15th February 1894; and that the Board of Trade has expressly claimed to control the discretion of the Official Receivers, both in respect of the expression of their opinion as to fraud having been committed and in respect of the presentation of their reports to the Court; and (2) whether the Board of Trade does now claim or does now exercise any control, and, if so, what control, over the Official Receivers in these two respects?

In reply to the last paragraph of the question, I have to state that the Board of Trade do not claim or exercise any control over Official Receivers in reference either to the contents of their reports to the Court, under Section 8, or the time of their presentation, beyond that of calling the attention of Official Receivers to any delays which may take place in presenting such reports, and communicating to them any observations or suggestions which may occur to the Department, with a view to ensuring that the Court is placed in possession of all the material facts and circumstances of the case. I may add, with reference to the alleged delay in presenting the report in the case referred to, that the Official Receiver states:—

"that he was unable to lodge his report at an earlier date in consequence of the complicated nature of the facts and the extent of the preliminary investigations which he had to conduct in order to elicit all the facts which were necessary for framing his report; but that the report was presented in accordance with his usual practice shortly after the first meeting of creditors, and as soon as he was in a position to do so."

Is it not a fact that the Judge stated that there had been delay, and that he threatened to commit the Official Receiver, if he did not present a report?

These matters engaged the attention of the Board of Trade before I took Office; and I have not had an opportunity of examining all the records. I have given all the information asked for in the question.

But the right hon. Gentleman is the representative of the Board of Trade, and I claim the right of asking what the Department is doing in the matter.

I have told the hon. Member what the position of the Board of Trade is. He cannot expect me to answer off-hand questions relating to what happened before I took Office. If he desires further information he must ask for it in the usual way.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, what is the total cost at the present time for all purposes of the establishment, in connection with the Board of Trade steamer Gadfly, on the Clyde, and The Midge, on the Thames; and, whether the whole of such cost, or, if not, what part thereof, is charged to the Mercantile Marine Fund?

The total cost for the year ending 31st March last, of the establishment in connection with the Board if Trade steamer Gadfly on the Clyde, was £1,264; and that of the two launches Mantis and Midge, on the Thames, was £2,716. The whole of the cost is charged to the Mercantile Marine Fund.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education what special duties Mr. Sadler has been appointed to carry out in the Education Department; whether he is the same gentleman who succeeded the right hon. Gentleman as Bursar of Christ College, Oxford; whether the appointment was open to competition or examination by the Civil Service Commissioners; and, under what sub-head the salary for the office was voted by Parliament?

The work of the Director of Special Inquiries and Reports, to which post Mr. Sadler has been appointed, will be to collect and record much information on educational matters at home and abroad of which the Department is constantly in need. Reports based on his inquiries will be published from time to time under the direction of the Department. The appointment, like other similar appointments in the Education Department and elsewhere, was direct and not by competition. The salary will be in the Estimates of this year under a special sub-head in the Education Vote. There is no Christ College at Oxford: the name is Christ Church, and the office mentioned is that of Steward, not Bursar. Mr. Sadler was appointed by the governing body to succeed me in that office when I left Oxford ten years ago. What this has to do with the subject I do not know. Mr. Sadler, as secretary of the University Extension Delegacy of the University, and in other ways, has rendered most distinguished services to education in this country, which are so well known that I need not add anything on this subject myself.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the appointment of Mr. Sadler has not received general approval from those interested in educational questions.

So far as I have the means of knowing, I believe the appointment has received the assent and cordial approval of persons interested in Education.

Are we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman claims the right to appoint somebody to an office the creation of which has not been approved by Parliament, and for which no salary has been voted, and that without going through the ordinary routine of reference to the Civil Service Commissioners?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give this House the assurance that Mr. Sadler can spell a word of two syllables?

The appointment has been made in the same way as many similar appointments.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, under what section of the Poor Law Acts the officials of the Local Government Board based their refusal of the application recently made by the Clerk to the Portsea Union Guardians for leave to vote £500 from the rates to the Mayor's Fund for the relief of distress in Portsmouth?

The powers of Boards of Guardians in regard to their expenditure are defined by statute; and I was advised that there is no statutory enactment which authorises such an expenditure as was proposed by the Portsmouth Guardians, and that consequently it would be illegal.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that under the Act 15 Vic., c. 105, Section 4, it is provided that the Poor Law Guardians may pay out of the common fund any sum of money, as an annual subscription towards the support and maintenance of any institution, which appears to the, Guardians to be calculated to render useful aid in their administration of relief to the poor, and whether the Mayor's Fund would not be covered by this section of the Act?

I have not in my mind the clause referred to; but in the opinion of the Local Government Board, a Board of Guardians would not be justified in handing over money raised by rate to be distributed by another body in on way responsible to the Guardians?

May I ask whether, in view of the present exceptional circumstances, the Local Government Board would be prepared to look with a lenient eye on an application of this kind?

I am simply bound by the law, and I cannot authorise a payment outside the limits allowed by law.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether the Army Reservists will be entitled on 1st April next to the sum of £1. 10s. 8d., a quarter's pay, and also to £3 deferred pay (from 1st April 1894 to 1st April 1895); and whether he could make arrangements for them to receive at once, say, half their pay, in view of the privations they are suffering from the inclemency of the season?

The money payable on the 1st April to men of the Army Reserve, is included in the Estimate for the next financial year, and there are no funds now available for such a service.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether he has been able to formulate a plan to prevent the transmission through the Post Office of lottery circulars from other countries which periodically flood this country, whilst similar lottery adventures are illegal in Great Britain and Ireland?

The question of preventing the transmission of lottery advertisements through the Post is receiving very careful attention from my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and myself, But I am not at the present moment in a position to announce the decision of the Government on the subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether members of the Irish Pharmaceutical Society are as eligible for appointments for Dispenserships under the Local Government Board as members of the English Pharmaceutical Society; and, if not, will they be placed on the same footing?

I am advised that it is open to doubt whether members of the Irish Pharmaceutical Society are eligible for appointment to the Dispenserships referred to. I shall be happy to consider whether the regulations affecting the appointment of these officers should be altered in this respect.

Who has started a doubt in this case affecting the status of the Irish Society's members?

That I cannot say; but I know there is a doubt upon the subject, and I shall be happy to remove it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if steps are being taken to relieve the County Limerick from the tax for extra police, as, according to resolution passed at last Presentment Sessions, such extra force is wholly unnecessary, and which is borne out by the remarks of the County Court Judge.

The extra force charged to the County Limerick has been reduced by l5 men, dating from the 1st inst. A further reduction of five men has been decided on, and will shortly be carried out. The total reduction (20) is equivalent to a relief to county rates to the extent of about £650 per annum. No further reduction is practicable at present.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he has received resolutions from the Newcastle West and Rathkeale Boards of Guardians, and the Fairs and Markets Association of Newcastle West, as well as a memorial from the residents of Glin, County Limerick, directing attention to the great distress prevailing among the labourers and small farmers in the western parts of the county, and urging the opening of relief works to meet the present deplorable condition of the working classes in these districts; and what steps, having regard to the critical condition of the people, the Government are taking in the matter.

The resolutions referred to have been received by the Local Government Board. There is no doubt that, owing to the exceptionally severe weather during the past few weeks, the poorer class, and especially those living in towns, have been reduced to great straits and have suffered much. The relieving officer of the Newcastle West Union has relieved provisionally those requiring assistance, and this officer may be relied upon to see that no persons suffer from actual want of food. The Local Government Board will instruct their inspector to attend the next meeting of the Guardians and consult with them as to the advisability of applying for authority to relax the restrictions on outdoor relief for a short period.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board why there has been so much delay in granting the application of the Town Council of Chard for an Order conferring on that Council the powers under Section 33 of the Local Government Act, 1894; and, whether this delay has been caused by any action of the Charity Commissioners?

The Local Government Board had under consideration the application made in the case of the Borough of Chard for vesting in the Town Council powers under Section 33 of the Local Government Act, 1894. But they have been advised that the resolution which was passed is insufficient, and that it is requisite that an application by a further resolution should be made. The Town Council were informed of this on the 6th inst.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that the Executive Committee of the County Councils Association has ex- pressed the opinion that the office of Valuer is a place of profit under the County Council, and that persons accepting the appointment will be disqualified from acting as County Councillors on the County Council appointing them; if so, has the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown been taken on this point; and, if that opinion accords with that of the Executive Committee above named, will the Government take steps to remove the disqualification?

I was not aware of the opinion stated to have been given by the Executive Committee of the County Councils Association; and the Local Government Board have not taken the opinion of the Law Officers on the point. Assuming that a Valuer is disqualified, I could not undertake to propose legislation for the purpose of removing the disqualification.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has taken any, and what, steps to change the present constitution of the Land Commission; and whether, if he does not at present possess the necessary power to make such changes, lie will insert provisions in the forthcoming Land Dill to enable him to do so.

The Judicial Commissioner has the status and tenure of office of a Judge of the Supreme Court. The other Land Commissioners have the status and tenure of office of County Court Judges, subject to this qualification, however—that they are removable by the Lord Chancellor for inability or misbehaviour. The Assistant Commissioners have the status of permanent Civil Servants. The constitution of the Land Commission was so fixed by the Land Acts of 1881 and 1891. It probably will become necessary to appoint additional Assistant Commissioners.

When do you expect to be able to introduce the Land Purchase Bill?

We have already announced the introduction of the Welsh Disestablishment Bill for Thursday, and, as soon as that is disposed of, subject to general changes, we shall follow it up immediately with the Irish Land Bill.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is in a position to state if the details of the Main Drainage Question are near a settlement; and whether there is any prospect of the work being commenced early this season?

I assume that the hon. Member refers to Dublin. There is not, at present, any question outstanding as to the Dublin drainage between the, War Department and the Corporation. Arrangements as to the work and its commencement rest entirely with the Corporation.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) whether the Swazi Queen Regent and Council have refused to issue the Organic Proclamation handing their country over to Boer rule, and have thrown themselves upon the protection of the British Government; (2) whether the Boers have the right, under the Convention of December 1894, to use force to compel the submission of the Swazis; and (3) whether Her Majesty's Government will permit our Swazi allies, whose independence Great Britain has affirmed in three solemn Conventions, to be forcibly subjugated by the Boers.

The Swazi Queen Regent and Council on the 15th inst., at their meeting, declined to sign the draft Organic Proclamation recommended for their acceptance. They asserted that they belonged to the Queen, a statement which is entirely incorrect; as Her Majesty's Government are precluded by Treaty engagements from declaring a Protectorate over Swaziland. Under the Convention of 1894 the South African Republic will be responsible for peace and order in Swaziland. Her Majesty's Government trust that the Swazis will be wisely and prudently guided by the white men who have assumed the responsibility of advising them, and that they will peacefully accept a settlement in which Her Majesty's Government have been careful to safeguard all Native interests. As regards the third question I do not admit the assumption on which it is based; I endeavoured to explain to the House the other day, that the allegation that the Independence of Swaziland was guaranteed to the Swazis is unfounded. Under the Convention in question the two Powers interested each pledged itself to the other not to interfere in Swaziland without the assent of the other. As a matter of fact the independence of the Swazis has practically ceased to exist since 1888. I would point out that under the new Convention, Swaziland is not incorporated in the South African Republic; and that the King of Swaziland will remain Paramount Chief of the Swazis in Swaziland with the usual powers of such Paramount Chief. The management of the internal affairs of the Natives shall be in accordance with their own laws and customs, and the Native laws and customs will be administered by the Native Chiefs entitled to administer the same, in so far as the said laws and customs are not inconsistent with civilised laws and customs; and the Natives are guaranteed in their continued use and occupation of land now in their possession, and of all grazing or agricultural rights to which they are at present entitled. Further, a special officer will be appointed by the South African Republic to administer Swaziland who will be selected in communication with the High Commissioner. Finally, a British Consul will be appointed to reside in Swaziland.

asked—(1) whether, in the event of the Boers using force to subjugate our former allies, Her Majesty's Government would permit British subjects or persons of English birth to be forcibly trepanned and compelled to take part in the military operations against their will, as was the case on a recent occasion; and (2) whether, in the event of British subjects offering armed assistance to the Swazis in the protection of their liberties, they would be violating any Act of Parliament.

The last paragraph of the question involves a legal matter which I could not deal with without notice. The rest of the question is purely hypothetical, and the hon. Member would hardly expect me to answer the points raised seriatim. As to whether British subjects will be commandeered for any expedition against the Swazis or anyone else, the hon. Member must be fully aware that under the terms of the Convention which we have negotiated with the South African Republic British subjects are practically exempt from compulsory commandeering.

Do I understand, then, that prior to the Convention it would have been within the power of the Boers legally to commandeer British subjects.

I do not think this arises out of the original question. If the hon. Member wants information, I may say that, until the new Convention, which we negotiated the other day, British subjects were liable to be commandeered, but by the Convention they are now exempted.

asked whether the Convention required any ratification, and, if so, whether it had been ratified by the Volksraad?

It will ultimately require ratification by the Volksraad, but we have the assurances not only of President Kruger, but of the Volksraad, that the Convention, which has been signed, will come into force and remain in force until ratified by the Volksraad, which ratification we expect will take place in a month or so.

asked whether the hon. Gentleman was understood to say that the Government of Great Britain was precluded by Treaty from protecting the Swazis or assuming a Protectorate over them?

That is so. In March 1890, the late Mr. W. H. Smith, then Leader of the House, was questioned on the subject, and he said it would be a breach of Article 12 of the Convention of 1884 to establish a British Protectorate over Swaziland without the consent of the South African Republic.

asked whether the Boers were not equally bound by the Conventions of 1881 and 1884 not to interfere with the independence of the Swazis?

Certainly. They are bound not to interfere without the assent of Her Majesty's Government.

asked whether in view of the statement just made, and the fact that the freedom of some 70,000 people was now at stake, the British Government would allow the Boers to subjugate Swaziland by force.

It is a hypothetical question, which, as I have already said, I cannot answer.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I must press for an answer. The question is not hypothetical.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, if he will state the percentage reduction in the hours to be worked by the men employed in the Telegraph Factories of Holloway and Mount Pleasant from 1st March next over those worked now; whether the hours under the new system will be the same each day throughout the year; what will be the maximum hours (including meal times) in any one day from the commencement to the leaving off of work; and, whether overtime will be allowed under any circumstances?

Speaking generally, the reduction in the hours to be worked by the men employed in the Telegraph Factories at Holloway and Mount Pleasant is from 54 to 48 hours per week, being about 11 per cent. As far as I can at present say, the hours will be the same each day from Monday to Friday throughout the year, with a short day on Saturday. The maximum hours, excluding overtime, but including an hour for dinner, will not exceed 9¾ at either factory; but I cannot bind myself to any precise details at present. The hon. Member will see that I could not undertake that overtime will not in any circumstances be worked, but it is intended to avoid it as far as possible.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, if he proposes to postpone the introduction of the Bill to amend the Crofters' Act until after the publication of the Report of the Deer Forest Commission; and, if so, will he explain on what grounds?

I do not propose to introduce the Bill to amend the Crofters' Act until after the publication of the Report. The Commission has, with great expenditure of time and labour, made a complete survey of the seven counties, and have obtained in the course of so doing a thorough acquaintance with the condition of the Highlands. Their Report, and the maps which accompany it, will be of great value, and fresh legislation on the Crofter question should not be laid before the House until the Report is in the hands of Members.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the extent of the districts over which the present inspectors of coal mines in South Wales and Monmouthshire exercise supervision, the especially dangerous character of the collieries in those districts, and the very large number of persons employed, he will consider the advisability of appointing sub-assistant inspectors of mines from amongst the workmen to assist the inspectors in their duties?

My hon. Friend asked a similar question to this last August, when the Secretary of State told him that he had appointed two men of practical experience as workmen to be assistant inspectors of quarries and metalliferous mines; that he could not then go further; but, although he could not give any pledge as to the future, he would give full consideration to his and other representations on the subject. I am sorry that I cannot at present add anything to what was then said by the Secretary of State.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether three routes for a proposed Light Railway from Belmullet to Ballina have been surveyed, only one of which has been condemned, and that on the ground of expense; and, whether, seeing that such a Light Railway would open up the harbours of Broadhaven and Blacksod, either of the said harbours being capable of accommodating a large fleet of first-class battleships, he will, in view of the advantages, local and Imperial, which such railway offers, recommend its being constructed?

asked, whether the Bill to be introduced on the 21st inst., by the President of the Board of Trade, giving facilities for the formation of Light Railways in Great Britain, would be applicable to Ireland; and, if so, when was there a likelihood of Light Railways being constructed under its provisions?

I am not acquainted with the circumstances stated in the first paragraph, and as the notice has been so short, I have not had time to make inquiries; but I may say that, so far as the Government is concerned, the funds under the Light Railways Act 1889 are exhausted, and I could not hold out hope of assistance to such a line as is mentioned. I am informed that the Bill about to be introduced by the Government will not apply to Ireland.

asked whether, before the introduction of the Bill, in view of the distress in Ireland, and the great demand for the construction of Light Railways, the facilities offered for their construction in Great Britain would be extended to Ireland?

replied that the conditions of Ireland were so entirely different from those of other parts of the Kingdom, that he was afraid it was quite impossible.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether the Government propose to institute any inquiry into the recent disastrous floods in the Thames Valley, with a view to ascertaining what steps can be taken for their prevention or diminution in future; and, whether they are aware that the powers at present invested in the Thames Conservancy are inadequate for the purpose?

I understand that the Thames Conservancy Board have the whole matter under consideration. They held a public meeting last week at Maidenhead, and are holding another tomorrow at Windsor; but it is a fact, as the noble Viscount suggests, that they are not a Flood Authority. In these circumstances no Government Inquiry as is suggested is proposed?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether he is aware that, in response to a memorial sent to the Fishery Board by the fishermen of Inver, County Donegal, setting forth the benefit that would accrue to the locality by the erection of a pier and the deepening of the river mouth at the landing-place at Inver, the Inspectors of Fisheries held a Court of Inquiry at Inver in 1884 to investigate the merits of this application; (2) whether he is aware that, later in the same year, an eminent engineer from Edinburgh visited Inver at the request of the Government, and that an announcement was made in the Press in the Autumn of 1885 that the recommendations of the Inspectors of Fisheries and the Government Engineer were favourable, and that Inver had been placed on the list of localities which were specially recommended for piers to be constructed by the Government; and (3) whether, having regard to the distress prevalent in Inver from the failure of the potato crop, the Government will be able, with a view to the giving employment on works of public utility, to make arrangements for the construction of the pier which was recommended ten years ago.

The memorial referred to was forwarded to the Fishery Piers and Harbour Commission appointed under the Act 46 and 47 Vict., cap. 26, and was duly inquired into. That body had a certain sum of money only at its disposal, and in making out a list of works in order of importance, to which the money should be allotted, the case of Inver was excluded. With regard to the last paragraph I am informed by the Local Government Board, that it is not anticipated that it will become necessary to supplement the machinery of the ordinary Poor Law by the opening of Relief Works at Inver; but I may point out to my hon. and learned friend that the Congested Districts Board have undertaken the construction of a Pier at Port, a couple of miles from Inver, and that this work is now in the hands of the Contractor.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he is aware that dissatisfaction exists in the Royal Irish Constabulary at the system of transfer which prevails in the Minister counties: and, could he give the total cost to the country of such transfers since this Government took Office?

The Inspector General of Constabulary informs me he is not aware that any dissatisfaction exists in the force respecting transfers in the counties of Munster, or elsewhere. Removals may become necessary by the exigencies of the service, such as filling up of vacancies caused by retirement or discharge, and such cannot be avoided; or they may be carried out upon the application of individual member's seeking transfer. But the orders of the force require that men shall not be removed unnecessarily, as their "local knowledge" becomes lost by frequent changes. If my hon. and learned Friend would specify the class of transfer to which he refers, it would be possible to obtain the cost of them during the period mentioned; but to do so would entail an amount of clerical labour upon the force that would not be commensurate with results?

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether a man who, it is proposed, shall be removed for the good of the Service, has any means of making an appeal or representation to the Inspector General?

I take it he would, under those circumstances, press his claims on the District Inspector, and possibly on the County Inspector. I will not answer positively, but I will inquire whether there is a direct appeal from the Constable concerned to the Inspector General.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also inquire whether there is any case on record in which the Inspector General has over-ruled the desire of the County or District Inspector for transfer?

I think I could find a case in my own experience, but I will inquire.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what steps are being taken to relieve County Clare from the tax for extra police, and what is the total amount of the impost for extra police in Clare since 1881?