said, the Debate on the Motion had been adjourned for a fortnight in order to enable the directors of the London and North Western Railway Company to reconsider the attitude they had taken up in reference to a certain question which was then alluded to, but into which he was now precluded from entering, as it had been ruled out of order. The hon. Member for Carnarvon had, since the adjournment of the Debate, written a letter to the Railway Company—a copy of which had been sent to every Member of the House—and he had received a reply to that letter from the Company yesterday. He was not going I to enter into the question of policy raised by that letter, and he would only say that the reply of the directors emphasised——

Order, order! The hon. Gentleman is not entitled to go into the correspondence on a subject which has been ruled out of order on the ground that it was not relevant to the question before the House. The hon. Gentleman must confine himself to matters that are relevant.

said, he bowed to the ruling of the Speaker. The object of the Bill was to make certain alterations at Llandudno Junction, in North Wales. He would like to ask the right hon. Member for Dublin University, who was in charge of the Bill, whether alterations in that junction were as likely to be necessary in the future as they appeared to be at present? Was it not the fact that some of the county councils and other public bodies in North Wales had asked competing railway companies to take the place of the London and North Western Railway Company, who had hitherto enjoyed a large and valuable monopoly in North Wales, and was not this action taken because the rates of the Company between Chester and Holyhead were higher than the rates on other parts of the same railway system? He would further ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it tended to the interest of the London and North Western Railway that there should be an estrangement between the Company and people of North Wales, where the Company possessed such valuable privileges? Therefore, in order to give the company a further opportunity of meeting the wishes of the people of North Wales, he begged to move the adjournment of the Debate till Thursday, May 16.

said, Order, order! The hon. Member has already spoken. The main question is now before the House, and the hon. Member spoke to that on the last occasion that the Bill was before the House.

Upon the point of Order I wish to say, Sir, that I did not speak upon the main question, but upon the question that the Debate; be now adjourned, and the Motion I propose making now is not the main question at all, but a totally different question.

The hon. Member is I think mistaken. When the Bill was called for Third Reading the hon. Member rose and spoke. In the course of his speech, no doubt, he moved the adjournment, but that was speaking on the main question.

On the point of Order may I ask whether the hon. Member would be in Order in moving to re-commit a certain portion of the Bill as regards particular clauses?

No, he would not.

I beg to move that this Bill be recommitted in respect of the clauses affecting North Wales.

I think I cannot accept the Motion in that form. It would be impossible to know what was committed to the care of the Committee if the words of the Motion were that it should be recommitted in respect of the clauses relating to North Wales. There might be considerable dispute as to what clauses did relate to North Wales. I think, moreover, to be in form the Motion should be to recommit the Bill to the former Committee.

I beg to move that, the Bill be recommitted to the former Committee in respect of Clauses 13 and 14.

seconded the Amendment.

May I ask you, Sir, as a matter of Order, whether it would be possible at this stage of the Bill to consent on behalf of the promoters to these particular clauses being struck out of the Bill with a view of facilitating the progress of the measure, and of allowing the hon. Members who object to these clauses to take the responsibility of their being lost.

It is a matter for the House to decide after recommittal. It is, I understand, the practice of the House, if there is to be any alteration of that kind, to direct that the Bill must be recommitted.

said, he understood that the Bill, by virtue of this Motion, must stand over till to-morrow or Monday, and that it could not be debated now.

What the hon. Member has moved is an Amendment to the Motion for the Third Reading. Being in the nature of an Amendment to the Motion for Third Reading it can be disposed of now.

said, he understood that the right hon. Gentleman who was in charge of the Bill was prepared to accede to this Motion.

No, no.

said, then they must press it. They objected to any further powers being given to the London and North Western Railway Company in North Wales to make any extension of any sort or kind. The preamble of the Bill declared that it was expedient to confer further powers upon the company as regarded the whole undertaking, and to extend and enlarge their existing provisions. He did not agree that it was expedient that the powers of the company should be extended as regarded North Wales, and he therefore supported the Amendment.

desired to say one word, not in any respect upon the merits of the question, but simply to explain the reasons of the vote which many of them felt bound to give. The Speaker had ruled that the merits, that was to say, the motive which was behind this Motion, could not be entered into. They had accepted that ruling. They considered, therefore, that in the vote which many of them would give, no expression of opinion whatever was involved upon the merits of the question that led to these proceedings, and they expressed no opinion at all upon that point. The vote he should give entirely related to supporting the practice of the House in not bringing into questions of private business matters which the Speaker had ruled did not properly arise on a Bill.

would be the last man to question the Speaker's ruling that it would be out of order to discuss the policy of the company on the Third Reading of this Bill, but he would point out that since this Motion came on a new element had been introduced into the discussion by the company themselves. Yesterday they published a long statement, a copy of which he held in his hand, and he ventured to say a more high-handed statement had never been heard of. [Cries of "Order."] If the words were unparliamentary, he would ask hon. Members to suggest other words, which would mean the same thing. If they were not allowed to discuss that statement, they were left in this ridiculous position—they were asked to vote upon a Bill without being allowed to discuss the reasons which the promoters themselves gave for passing it.

The right hon. Gentleman is really now infringing the ruling of the Chair.

said, he had not the least intention of infringing the ruling of the Chair. As it appeared they could not discuss the question before the House they would have to be silent, but he hoped that by vote they would maintain a not ineffective protest against this Bill.

thought the House was entitled to some explanation from the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman told them he was prepared to delete the Clauses in question, and yet he was not prepared to accept the recommittal of the Bill, which was the only way in which that could be done.

explained, by way of personal explanation, that he did not desire to omit the two Clauses, but if the Bill could be facilitated—seeing that it contained a good many Clauses besides those objected to—if Welsh Members chose to take the responsibility, he would not be against dropping them out. So far as they went, the Clauses were entirely in the interests of the Welsh people themselves.

dissented from the explanation given by the President of the Board of Trade, because he said he sympathised with the Welsh people, and yet was going to vote against them.

I said nothing of the kind. I expressly guarded myself from expressing any opinion whatever.

said, that he must challenge a Division. He and other hon. Members felt bound to protest against this Bill to the very end.

said that this instruction involved questions of great importance, and he must express his suprise that no reason had been given for it. The Standing Order it was sought to suspend provided that before a Committee of the House could have power to amalgamate two Companies, those Companies should be called upon by the Board of Trade to prove that half of the capital of the different Companies had been subscribed. If the power which this instruction proposed to give to the Committee were given, it would be a very serious matter indeed to the town of Kirkcaldy and the neighbouring burghs. Therefore he thought he was entitled to ask for the reasons why the instruction was moved. So far as his constituency was concerned, he could say that all business men were opposed to any further powers being conferred on the North British Railway Company, and certainly, if the Bill reached a third reading, he should take the opinion of the House upon it.

agreed that the House was entitled to ask for and to get some reasons for the suspension of this Standing Order. If the President of the Board of Trade concurred in the Motion, he submitted that he ought to give his reasons for so doing.

said he did not know whether his hon. Friend the Member for West Aberdeenshire, who was responsible for the Motion, had any reasons to give for it. Certainly if those in charge of Private Business came to the House and asked for the suspension of a Standing Order they ought to give some reason for it. As no reason had been given he begged to move that "this Debate be now adjourned."

said he was very unwilling to trouble the House with what was an absolutely technical point, but as one of the directors of the North British Railway he would like to say a few words.

The question before the House is that the Debate be now adjourned. I ask you, Sir, whether the hon. Gentleman is in Order in what he is now saying?

I understand that the right hon. Gentleman, is desirous of giving the explanations that have been asked for. Probably in that case the hon. Member for Caithness will withdraw his Motion.

Yes, Sir, I should wish to do so.

continuing, said, that this Standing Order was frequently suspended without a single word being said in the House. It was a question upon which both the authorities of the Board of Trade and the officials of the House were obliged to satisfy themselves, that there was good reason for allowing to a company the special facilities asked for. These authorities had looked into this matter very carefully and had satisfied themselves on that point, otherwise the business would not have been allowed to go through. He did not know whether the House wished him to enter into details with regard to both these railways, and as to the reasons which had induced the Board of Trade and the Speaker's Counsel to assent to the course that was now proposed. The position was this: the whole of the money which had been spent on one of these railways was North British money, and the Standing Order could be avoided altogether by issuing share certificates. The other railway was not yet constructed, and in that case it was rather a matter of transfer of powers than amalgamation. But there was another and wider point raised, which had not been brought forward on this occasion, because the Speaker's ruling in regard to the provious Bill had kept it out. Grave charges of breach of faith were brought against the North British Company, both towards the House and towards the people of the district which his hon. Friend below him represented.

The hon. Member must not proceed to refute charges which have not been raised in Debate.

I am perfectly prepared to substantiate every word I have said.

No question of this kind can be entered into now.

I was going to say that there is not the slightest foundation—

Order, order. The hon. Member is now proposing to deny charges that have not been made in Debate. In that he is out of order.

Well, Sir, if that had been made—

Order, order.

observed that this Standing Order, though a very useful one, was frequently dispensed with in special circumstances. This case was carefully considered by Mr. Speaker's Counsel and by the Board of Trade, and they were of opinion that it was a case in which the Standing Order might be dispensed with. It only gave the Committee power to consider whether it ought to be done.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman what are the special reasons alluded to?

I should also like to ask what are the reasons.

hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give the reasons, otherwise hon. Member would be voting in the dark. One of the reasons why the Board of Trade was kept up was that its officers should look into these questions and tell the House all about them. What the House wanted was that they should give all the assistance they required. Surely his hon. Friend was right in asking what the reasons were.

If it is in order for me to speak again, I may say that the reasons were stated concisely but clearly by the right hon. Member for Partick. On the grounds he has stated it seemed to be very desirable that the Committee should have power to consider whether the Standing Order should be suspended.

May I ask——

Order, order. The hon. Member has already spoken.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, whether he has received resolutions from the landless people in various parts of the Island of Lewis, urging upon Her Majesty's Government the necessity for empowering the Crofters' Commission to apportion at fair rents the land there now lying waste and suitable for crofts; and, whether it is the intention of the Government to take any steps on the lines indicated?

I have received the resolutions to which the hon. Member's question relates. In connection with the question, I may refer to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Invernesshire on Thursday, the 2nd instant. Under the Scottish Local Government Act of 1894 allotments may be granted to cotters and others under conditions much wider and more generous than those of the English Act. For this reason, and because it is imprudent largely to increase the scope of the Bill, the Government have introduced it in its present shape. I may say that a very large extent of land in the Lewis has been scheduled as fit for the extension of crofters' holdings, which the Bill is framed to facilitate.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state the number of retired Scotch schoolmasters who are in receipt of a pension, their names, the age of each, the term of service, and the amount of pension paid in each case?

It is obviously impossible within the limits of an answer to give the information desired by the hon. Member; but if he will move for it in the shape of a Parliamentary Return, I shall consider whether it may be furnished. The terms of such a Return would have to be stated somewhat more specifically than is indicated in the question, and I shall be glad to confer with the hon. Member as to this.

I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, what is the total number of times the Official Receiver for North Wales and Chester has attended personally at the Bankruptcy Courts at Bangor, Portmadoc, and Festiniog on public examinations of bankrupts, examinations under Section 27 of the Bankruptcy Act, and on motions by or against the Official Receiver, and what is the total number of similar attendances by the deputy Official Receiver; is he aware that the Official Receiver carries on business for his own benefit as solicitor at Wrexham, while the deputy Official Receiver is practically discharging all the duties of the Official Receiver in the districts of Bangor, Portmadoc, and Festiniog; what is the salary of the Official Receiver; and what is the salary of the deputy, and by whom is it paid?

Since the 1st Jan, 1894, the Official Receiver for North Wales and Chester has made 11 personal attendances at the Courts mentioned, and the Assistant Official Receiver has made 55 attendances. The Official Receiver, like most of his colleagues in the provinces, is not a salaried officer. He is allowed to engage in private practice (not connected with bankruptcy or insolvency) and is paid a fee for each Receiving Order. The average gross remuneration earned by him during the last three years is about £1,000 per annum, out of which he has to pay the salary of the Assistant Official Receiver, clerks' wages, office rent. &c. The salary of the Assistant Official Receiver is a matter of private arrangement with his employer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) with reference to the sworn inquiry held in connection with the admission and treatment of Hanna Bella Craig, who died in Belfast Workhouse, whether he is aware that on her admission she was sent to the infirmary, and that on the same night she was ordered to be removed to the lunatic department without any previous physical examination; that when lying in a faint on the floor at midnight she was lifted by two attendants, and while yet unconscious was bound in a straitwaistcoat, and with no covering save her underdress and a single blanket round her shoulders, was obliged to walk barefooted down three flights of steps; that she was then carried in the open air with a single blanket spread over her, a distance of a quarter of a mile, to the lunatic department on an October night; and that she died within a week, and on the night of her death was held down in bed by seven persons, including pauper attendants; (2) whether he has been informed that one of the pauper attendants admitted on oath that she had been upwards of 150 times in gaol; and (3) whether any steps have been taken to prevent such treatment from being given to paupers in future.

The statements in the first and second paragraphs are generally correct except that the girl was covered with a second blanket before her removal to the lunatic department. The Guardians have, since the death of the girl, increased the nursing staff by 10, making the total number of paid nurses 72, and have also directed that no patient shall be transferred from any department of the workhouse to the lunatic ward without consultation by the medical staff.

I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, whether it is intended to levy the Railway Passenger Duty on the light railways that may be constructed under the Bill of the Government now before the House, or whether a light railway, like a railway upon the high road, is not to be regarded as a railway at all?

It is not intended to levy Railway Passenger Duty on the light railways which may be constructed under the Bill now before the House, and I propose to move a clause in Committee making it clear that they are to be exempt.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the statement that laundries are already to some extent under the Factory Acts, how often Section 1, Sub-section 1, of the Factory Act of 1891 has been acted upon as regards laundries; and, when the annual report of the Chief Inspector will be published?

No order has been made under Section 1, Subsection 1, of the Factory and Workshops Act, 1891, either with respect to workshops or to laundries. I hope that the Chief Inspector's report will be published next week.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, what would be the cost of laying a cable connecting Sark with Guernsey, a distance of seven miles; whether he has in stock a surplus supply of cable telegraph wire sufficient for the purpose indicated; whether he will again call for a report on the subject of the necessity of laying this cable, in the interests of commerce and navigation; and, whether he will consult the Board of Trade on the subject?

I have had before me all the information necessary to a consideration of the question whether a telegraph cable should be laid to Sark, and I can only express my regret that, under the Regulations laid down by the Treasury, it is not in my power to carry out the extension in the absence of a guarantee either from the Government of Guernsey, or from the residents.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, when the exhaustive trials of the boilers in H. M. S. Sharpshooter will commence; and whether he will state the nature and conditions of those trials?

The Sharpshooter has been detached from the Channel Squadron for the purpose of carrying out further trials of her boilers at sea. These trials will commence next month, and will be of an exhaustive character. The nature and conditions of the trials will be communicated to the hon. Member when the arrangements are complete.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether the Irish Government is likely soon to carry out the suggestions of the Commissioners of Education in Ireland with reference to the Christian Brothers Schools?

I addressed my first communication to the Commissioners of National Education on February 5. They replied on February 25, submitting a Resolution. On March 2 I asked them to be good enough to frame rules which would enable us fully and accurately to comprehend their proposal. The rules so framed were forwarded to me on April 19. These rules I have since been examining and considering, and I shall send a reply upon them before the meeting of the National Education Board on Tuesday next.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether Her Majesty's Government have received any confirmation of the report that a French Expedition has occupied and fortified a position on the banks of the River Niger; whether this position is situated within the limits of the districts over which Her Majesty's Government declared a Protectorate in June 1885; and whether any explanation of the proceedings of this reported expedition have been tendered by, or requested from, the French Government?

We have been told by the Niger Company that they have received information from their Agent as to the occupation of a position by a French expedition on the Niger within the limits of the British Protectorate under the Notification of 1887. In reply to a communication which has been made to the French Government, we have been informed that Captain Toutée, who is reported to be the leader of this expedition, is a private traveller. Further inquiries are promised, in order to obtain more complete information.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, if his attention has been directed to the report of a sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment inflicted by the Sessions Judge at Howrah upon a prisoner charged before him with stealing a few vegetables from a field; and, if so, will he call for an inquiry into the truth of the report?

I have not seen any report of such a case, but I am informed that the man must have been, an habitual offender, or he would not have been committed to the Sessions. Every sentence passed by a Sessions Court is reported to the High Court, and the High Court can revise it either of its own motion or upon petition by the person sentenced. If my hon. Friend will supply me with the facts of this case, I will consider whether further inquiry should be made.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether it will be needful for the Government to take any steps to carry out the provisions of the Equalisation of Rates (London) Act, 1894, which, by Clause 3, Section 1, enacts that a census shall be taken for the purpose of ascertaining the number of persons present within each parish in the, administrative county of London on the night of Sunday, 29th March 1896, or if this census will be carried out by officials appointed by the London County Council; and whether, if Parliament should so provide, there would be any practical difficulty in having taken at the same date in 1896 a religious census of the inhabitants of Wales and Monmouthshire, where the population by the last census in 1891 was 2,051,647, or less than half that of the population of the county of London?

No further legislation will be needful to enable the census required by the Equalisation of Rates (London) Act to be taken. The Act provides that the census shall be taken by the Registrar General, and that the cost shall be defrayed by the London County Council. It will not be possible, therefore, under the Act of last year, to obtain a religious census for Wales.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of the question?

I think it will not be possible, under the Act of last year, to obtain a religious census in Wales.

But if a Bill be passed for that purpose, will there be any difficulty?

I do not know whether Parliament this year would pass such a Bill.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for the Eye Division of Suffolk, as a Charity Commissioner, whether any result has followed from the last inquiry which was promised, concerning the application and administration of the Endowments of St. Katherine's Hospital in the Regent's Park, or whether what the late Charity Commissioner in this House described as a scandal still exists; whether £6,402 is annually expended upon salaries and management, £561 upon education, and £190 upon gifts; whether the Master still receives a salary of £1,200, and what are the duties connected with his office; how many inquiries have at different times been instituted into this Endowment, and what changes have resulted from such inquiries; and whether he will cause to be laid upon the Table of the House a copy of the Reforms which Mr. Skirrow, on behalf of the Charity Commissioners, proposed several years ago, and also a statement of the income and expenditure of the Hospital during the year ending 31st December last?

The Charity Commissioners have no information as to the result of the last inquiry promised as to the administration of this hospital, and they have no reason to suppose that the hospital is conducted otherwise than has hitherto been the case. As regards the particular items of account mentioned in the question, it is impossible, for the reason given by the late Prime Minister, in his answer in this matter on November 3rd, 1893, to answer this part of the question. The accounts of the Charity are open to the inspection of the hon. Member at the office of the Commissioners. Three inquiries have been instituted into this Endowment, namely, by Lord Brougham's Commission in 1837; by Mr. Skirrow, an Inspector of the Commissioners, in 1865; and by a Royal Commission in 1869. The only change in the administration of the hospital made subsequently to these inquiries, so far as the Commissioners are aware, is that effected by the rules framed by Lord Chancellor Cairns, on July 22, 1878. Mr. Skirrow's Report, in which certain reforms are recommended, was laid upon the Table of the House of Lords as a Parliamentary Paper in the year 1866. In the year 1894, the net receipts of the hospital were £6,365 0s. 10d., and the expenditure £6,324 12s. 8d., leaving a credit balance of £40 8s. 2d.

Will the Charity Commissioners lay Mr. Skirrow's Report on the Table of this House, as I understand it was presented to the other House only?

The Paper printed in 1866 was laid on the Table of the House of Lords. The question whether it can be laid on the Table of this House will be considered. The Charity Commissioners have no control, direct or indirect, over this hospital.

gave notice that he would put a Notice of Motion on the Paper on this subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the attention of the Board of Trade has been directed to the fact that, on the 30th April last, on the occasion of a partisan demonstration in Mohill, the Directors of the Cavan and Leitrim Light Railway ran a special train from Belturbet to Mohill, to carry persons to that meeting; whether he is aware that there were not more than 40 persons carried on this occasion by the special train; and whether, as the cesspayers of South Leitrim and the Treasury have jointly to make up, under the guarantee, the dividend and all losses in connection with this railway, steps will be taken by the Board of Trade to point out to the Directors the inadvisability of running special trains at a loss to serve political and partisan purposes.

This question has been referred to me, but I can only say that I am not aware that the Government has any power to interfere in the business arrangements of this railway.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, having regard to the settlement between Her Majesty's Government and the British East Africa Company primarily accepted by the latter on the 27th March, when the Government purposes to advise the Sultan of Zanzibar to take over the assets of the Company, as per letter of the Foreign Office, of February 21st, and resume the administration of the coast zone, and so relieve of the burden the shareholders of the Company, already seriously impoverished?

As the payment of £50,000 by Her Majesty's Government is an integral part of the arrangement come to with the Company, we cannot proceed to carry out, other parts of the arrangement until the consent of Parliament has been obtained for the payment of this sum.

May I ask whether the expenses of administration have still to be borne by the Company, although the bargain is completed as between them and the Government?

That is a very different question. I must ask for notice of it.

May I ask whether it is a fact that there is already in the Bank of England a sum of £200,000 belonging to the Sultanate, which is already available for carrying out the arrangement as between the Sultan and the Company?

Yes, Sir, that is so; but the arrangement will stand or fall as a whole; and we cannot carry out one part without carrying out the whole; and we cannot carry out the whole without the authority of a Vote of this House.

When do the Government propose, to take the Vote?

That is hardly a question to be addressed tome: it must, I suppose, depend upon the condition of public business.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, if he has any evidence to show whether milk obtained from cows suffering from foot and mouth disease is injurious to health; and, whether large quantities of milk are imported from Holland, which is scheduled under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1878, as containing cattle infected with foot and mouth disease; if so, will he take proper precautions to prevent such milk from being utilized for human consumption in this country?

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether any steps have been taken by the Department to secure the prohibition of importation of foreign milk from countries from which the, importation of cattle is already prohibited by the Board of Agriculture; if not, will he, in view of the Report recently issued by the Department on the spread of tuberculosis through the consumption of milk from diseased animals, confer with the President of the Board of Agriculture upon the subject, in order to stop such importation of milk from the countries aforesaid?

I am not aware that there is any evidence that disease has been spread in this country by imported milk. With insignificant exceptions imported milk is in a condensed form, and the processes of heat to which it is subjected, I am advised, destroys its power to convey infection, whether of foot-and-mouth disease or tuberculosis. The Local Government Board have no power to prohibit the importation of foreign milk.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether he is yet in a position to state how soon he will be able to lay upon the Table the Report of the Committee on Distress for Want of Employment?

I have had no opportunity of ascertaining the view of my colleagues on the Committee, and can only speak for myself. The subject referred to us is a large and complicated one, and the Committee would not, in my opinion, be doing its duty if it offered advice to the House without adequate information as to the facts and as to the principal remedies that have been proposed. We are, therefore, busily engaged in obtaining such information from the most promising sources. But I trust that this necessary process will not occupy more than a few weeks longer, and that the Committee will then be able to come to its conclusions on the points before it, and to submit a Report. We are most anxious, on every ground, to avoid unnecessary delay.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he has considered that part of the Committee's Report on Prisons just circulated (paragraph 104) in which the Committee state that the whole prison staff is undermanned, and also that the specific question of hours of work was excluded from their reference, and they had not taken evidence on the subject, but that the Committee felt bound to express their opinion that the hours of duty of warders generally amount to the maximum which ought to be imposed, and, further, that if a warder is expected to make a constant mental effort to deal kindly and wisely by all the prisoners under his charge, it is too much to expect him to maintain the effort throughout the time which he has now to work; and, whether he will inquire into the question above mentioned with a view to such amelioration of the hours of work as may be found appropriate?

This question will not be lost sight of in the consideration of the Committee's Report.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in how many National Schools in Ireland instruction is given on the sloyd or kindergarten principle; and, whether he will call the attention of the National Board to the Report issued on this subject by the Scotch Education Department?

The number of National Schools in which kindergarten exercises were taught in 1894 was 305, and the number of pupils examined in these exercises was 34,520. The special system known as "sloyd" is not taught in any of the National Schools, but practical instruction of a kindred character was given in handicraft in the past year in 14 National Schools, and the number of pupils examined in the subject at the Annual Results Examinations of 1894 was 218. I shall refer the Report mentioned in the question to the National Board of Education.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in what places Industrial Schools are conducted by the School Boards, and which of those schools are for girls; whether he can say whether any, and, if so, which, of such schools have been successful; and, whether he can say how many Catholic children are confined there, and by whom is the religious education of those children conducted?

Excluding truant schools for short periods of detention, there are eight industrial schools managed by School Boards—two by the London School Board, one by the Brighton and Preston Boards, and one each by the School Boards of Leicester, Leeds, Middlesbrough, Bristol, and Hull. The last two are girls' schools. These schools have all been successful, except one of the girls' schools. There are 113 Roman Catholic children in four of the schools. In three of them a priest visits regularly once a week, and in two there are also Roman Catholic teachers. In the fourth there are only eight Roman Catholic children, admitted at the request of their parents.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies if the attention of the Secretary of State has been called to the demand for further railway extension in Ceylon; and, has he considered the desirability of encouraging the construction of railways and feeding lines of tramways by private enterprise in that colony; and, if so, will he instruct the Government of Ceylon to afford encouragement and grant facilities to those who may be desirous of promoting and constructing such lines?

The Government of Ceylon has shown great enterprise in extending the railway system of the colony, and there seems therefore no occasion to send any special instructions to them on the subject. Any well-considered scheme which may be brought to the notice of the Secretary of State will, of course, receive attention.

I beg to ask the, Civil Lord of the Admiralty, upon what number of ships in the Navy have wet canteens been established; is it intended to establish them on other ships, or is the matter still in an experimental condition; if he can state what advantages, if any, are expected to accrue from this new departure; and, is it intended to establish temperance canteens in addition to, and separate from, these wet canteens?

There are 21 harbour establishments on the Home Station, including some harbour ships, where it is permitted to supply beer to the men under proper regulations. This is not a now departure. The system has been in existence for many years and works well, and is believed to be of great advantage to the men, keeping them from the public house. It is not proposed to extend the permission to seagoing ships. Every facility is given for the establishment of coffee canteens.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether he has received a petition from the clerks in the Ordnance Store Department in the Woolwich Arsenal, asking for an increase of wages; and, whether he is able to give effect to the respectful request made to him.

The condition of the clerks in the Ordnance Store Department at Woolwich has engaged attention for some time past, and improvements in status and remuneration have been made in respect of certain of the number. The petition referred to and other representations that have been received are under consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state approximately the strength of the military escorts and supports available in any case of emergency for the protection of the British political officers in the native States of Hyderabad, Mysore, Indore, and Gwalior; what was the strength of the military escorts and supports possessed by the British political officers at Gilgit and Chitral respectively before the murder of Nizam-ul-Mulk, the ruler of Chitral, by his brother on the 1st of January last; when did Nizam-ul-Mulk succeed to the throne, and what happened to his predecessor; and for how long a period had a British political officer been in Chitral before the murder of Nizam-ul-Mulk?

I do not consider it to be in the public interest to answer the first question of the hon. Member. At the date of the murder of Nizam-ul-Mulk the whole force under the Gilgit command numbered about 3,000 men, of whom 100 represented the escort of the assistant political officer in Chitral, whose station was at Mastuj. Besides his escort of 100 men, there were 700 men distributed on the route between Gilgit and Mastuj. Nizam-ul-Mulk became Mehtar in November, 1892, after deposing his uncle Sher Afzul. A British political officer was sent to Chitral at the end of 1892 at the request of the then Mehtar, Nizam-ul-Mulk, and has been maintained in Chitral since.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether it is the intention of the Government to recommend that the Inquiry into Indian affairs should take place before a Parliamentary Committee or Royal Commission; and, if the latter, what opportunity will be afforded to the House to discuss the terms of the reference to be made do the said Royal Commission?

No Inquiry into Indian affairs has been proposed by Her Majesty's Government. On the contrary, I distinctly refused to be a party to any such Inquiry. It is proposed that the Inquiry into Indian Expenditure should be conducted by a Royal Commission. It is not usual to discuss in this House the terms of a reference to a Royal Commission.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will place upon the Table of the House a sketch map showing by a red line the present external frontiers of British India upon the west and north-west so far as known, and indicating wherein the present external frontiers differ from those existing in 1860?

I will consult the Government of India as to the preparation of such a sketch map as is referred to by the honourable Baronet.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, for the past twelve months and upwards, the sewage from the Le Marchant Barracks, near Devizes, has, owing to a complete breakdown of the sewerage system provided there, been discharged in a crude state into the Kennet and Avon Canal, about a mile from the town; whether he is aware that the canal flows downwards from that point through the town, and supplies the water for a public bathing-place for the inhabitants; and, whether, having regard to the serious danger to health and the annoyance that has arisen, he will forthwith take such measures as are necessary to abate the nuisance?

The sewage of the barracks mentioned was disposed of by sub-irrigation under a portion of an adjoining field. For some time past the system has been overtaxed; and a relief drain was carried into the canal, in which it is understood that there is not much flow. Negotiations have just been concluded for the use of an enlarged area in treating the sewage; and the necessary work will be proceeded with at once.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Liverpool Tug Company's tug Gamecock has to-day (May 7th) towed into Queenstown Harbour a dangerous derelict from the Atlantic, the barque Brigette; and, whether the Government will give this Tug Company any reward in recognition of this successful search for a derelict in the Atlantic?

I have received information that the derelict Brigette has been towed into Queenstown as stated by the hon. Member. With regard to the salving tug, I can only repeat what I told the hon. Member on the 4th March last, that the Board of Trade have no funds to devote to the purpose suggested, and that it is open to any person who has brought a derelict or wreck of any description into port, to claim and obtain salvage from the owners of the property.

inquired whether it was not a fact that the Government had sent out two ships in search of derelicts?

said, he was unable to answer the question.

asked from what fund the Board of Trade provided rewards from time to time.

said this had nothing to do with the question of the hon. Member for Rotherhithe, and therefore it would not be in order to answer it.

pressed for an answer, but—

ruled that the Motion did not arise out of the question on the paper.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a Guardian of the poor of any union who during his term of office becomes contractor for such Union renders himself liable to forfeit £100, and that Mr. Moran, late candidate for the office of Poor Law Guardian of the Westport Union, was contractor for the supply of bread to the workhouse whilst holding that office last year; and, whether he will direct Mr. Lynch, Local Government Board Inspector, who is at present holding a sworn Inquiry on Mr. Moran's behalf into the validity of the election for the Clogher Division of the Westport Union, to prosecute the said Guardian for his alleged offence?

On the 3rd inst. I wrote to the hon. Gentleman in reference to this matter. Section 93 of the 1 and 2 Vic. cap. 56, provides that if a Guardian is concerned, directly or indirectly, in a contract for workhouse supplies whilst holding that office he renders himself liable to forfeit the sum of £100 "to any person who shall sue for the same." A complaint was made last year that the gentleman named in the question, who was then a Guardian, was concerned in a workhouse contract, but he denied the charge. The Local Government Board are advised that it would not be expedient to include in the scope of the present Inquiry an investigation into the charge referred to. The object of the present Inquiry is solely to determine the question which has been raised by Mr. Moran, as to whether his opponent at the recent election obtained a majority of votes. If he did his election will not be disturbed; and in the opinion of the Board it would not now be desirable to take sworn evidence on a matter which may hereafter form the subject of criminal proceedings.

said, he understood the Chief Secretary to say the fact was brought to the knowledge of the Local Government Board that this gentleman was a contractor while he was a Poor Law Guardian. Was it not the duty of the Inspector or the Board itself to investigate the matter and follow it up, and not be content with mere denials?

replied that he did not know what the duties of the Local Government Board were in a matter of this kind. It was a delicate thing for them to interfere in connection with a case which had not properly come before them. But he would inquire whether there was any obligation cast upon them.

said, he understood there was a sworn investigation going on as to whether this gentleman ought not to be entitled to be declared elected. Was it not a fact that the Local Government Board Inspector declined to investigate at the same time a charge which, if established, would have completely disqualified this gentleman.

said, he was not sure that it would have disqualified him. But penalties might have been recovered, no doubt.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, is it necessary, before a subject can be discussed at an annual parish meeting, that notice should have been previously given of the intention to raise such subject?

I have no authority to determine the question; but it appears to me that, if it is intended to bring a subject before an annual parish meeting, previous notice of such intention ought to be given.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether, having regard to the serious character of Major Cardew's Report on the explosions which occurred on 1st February last on Southwark Bridge, he will state whether the City of London Electric Lighting Company have now taken the necessary measures so as fully to comply with the regulations imposed on them by the Board of Trade for the protection of the public?

The Company state that, upon the receipt of Major Cardew's Report, they at once began to take the measures recommended in the Report to ensure compliance with the Regulations of the Board of Trade. I am informed that the Company are employing a large staff of men, and are pushing on the work. From its nature and extent, however, some time must necessarily elapse before it is completed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received a copy of a resolution adopted by the Corporation of Kilkenny with reference to the action of the General commanding the Cork Military District, in directing that the canteens for that district be supplied by one firm in Cork only; and, whether he will arrange that supplies for the garrison in Kilkenny be purchased from local traders, whereby good feeling and friendliness between the troops and the people of Kilkenny may be promoted?

A copy of the resolution has been received, but I can say no more than I said on the 29th April in reply to a question by the hon. Member for East Cork. I have also, in answer to other questions, fully explained this matter. I have no doubt that if the traders of Kilkenny will tender to supply articles of equal quality with those obtained from Cork at a lower price, they will receive the orders for the goods.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Jabez Balfour was arrested upon a warrant granted by an Extradition Court; and, upon what criminal charges he was arrested by virtue of such warrant?

Warrants of information were sent in the ordinary course to Argentina, and after the decision of the Courts of Law of that country the person named was arrested under the sanction of the Courts of Argentina.

asked the Attorney General to kindly answer his Question upon the Paper—upon what charges Jabez was arrested?

I should require to occupy the time of the House for at least 25 minutes if I were to answer the question. ["Hear, hear" and laughter.] I hope the House will be satisfied with the answer I have given. [Hear, hear.]

asked the Leader of the House whether, seeing that the Attorney General objected to giving the contents of the warrant against Jabez Balfour because it would take up too much time to give the answer by word of mouth, he would consent to lay a copy of the warrant on the Table of the House?

No, Sir; I would venture to submit to the hon. Member when legal proceedings of a criminal character are in progress that the less they are dealt with in this House the better. [Cheers.]

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that 30 writs and about 100 civil bill processes have been served on the Templemore Estate on which negotiations for sale are pending, and that the usual reduction, namely, 25 per cent., has been withdrawn; whether he is aware that the price asked by the landlord is 18 years' purchase, and that offered by the tenants 15 years' purchase; and whether he can use his influence or take any steps to prevent a quarrel between the landlord and tenants on this estate.

I am aware that a large number of tenants on this property have been served with writs and civil bill decrees, and that negotiations with a view to sale under the Purchase Acts have taken place between the landlord and the tenants. The former has offered to sell at 18 years' purchase on the basis of existing rents, whilst the tenants have offered 18 years on a revaluation, or 15 years' purchase on present rents. With regard to the last paragraph, the Executive Government has no means of exercising its influence in the direction suggested by the hon. Gentleman in the present instance, though I would fain express the hope that, even yet, some amicable arrangement may be brought about between the parties, and the further threatened proceedings thus obviated.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, whether the Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland have undertaken to make a contribution of at least £2,000 a year towards the net receipts of the Castlerea and Ballaghaderreen Railway, in case the Order in Council in regard to that line is sanctioned by the Treasury; and whether, if that Order is drawn in every respect similar to the Order in Council for the Ballinrobe and Loughrea arid Mitchelstown Railway, will that satisfy the Treasury as regards the legal point involved as to a heavy railway; and if not, why not?

I understand that evidence was given before the Privy Council that an arrangement had been entered into between the promoters and the Midland Great Western Railway, practically to the effect stated. The Treasury having no funds, the question of a new Order cannot arise.

Is the right hon. gentleman aware that the Ballinrobe and Claremorris and the Loughrea and Attymon Railways were built under an agreement embodied in an Order in Council, stating that they were to be built in every respect similar to the best portion of the Midland main line system, and that these lines are now worked by the Midland Great Western and the Great Southern and Western Railway Companies with their ordinary engines and rolling stock, in like manner as their main lines are worked; and whether, under these circumstances, the Treasury would reconsider their decision to continue to subscribe to these lines?

The Midland Great Western Railway Company are now working the lines in question as part of their general system under special power given them by the Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland Act 1891, Section 6, and not under the powers contained in the Order in Council, and so there is nothing for the Treasury to reconsider.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that a telephone is being erected in Bannow Post Office, county Wexford, instead of a telegraph, for which the ratepayers of the district gave a guarantee; whether he is aware that the ratepayers are dissatisfied to give a guarantee for a telephone; and whether any guarantee is required for a telephone; and, if so, will he recommend that the original agreement between the ratepayers and the postal authorities be carried out?

There has been no departure from the terms of the agreement for a Telegraph Office at Bannow. The guarantee was based on the assumption that the instrument would be a telephone, which is being largely used at country telegraph offices, and in many cases is the most suitable instrument for the purpose.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, with reference to the death in Unyoro of Captain Dunning, D.S.O., the Assistant Administrator of Uganda, whether there has been any fighting there, and what is the last news from the new protectorate; what amount has been spent in transport between Mombasa and Uganda; and, whether caravans can proceed to the Uganda from the Coast, and vice versa.

The latest news received is dated February 12. It was to the effect that Kaba Rega had sent a force to raid two Uganda provinces, and that steps had been taken to intercept the raiders. The approximate total spent on transport between Mombasa and Uganda during the last twelve months is £27,000. Caravans can proceed regularly to and from Uganda.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, how many local authorities in the metropolis have applied to the Local Government Board since last December for the transfer of powers under Section 33 of the Local Government Act, 1894; how many Orders have been issued upon such applications; by what date it is expected that the issue of Orders, or other determinations of the Local Government Board, will be communicated to the other applying authorities; and, what is the cause of the delay in dealing with such applications?

Out of 700 applications which the Local Government Board have received for a transfer of powers under the section, about 20 relate to London. The Board have dealt with 565 of these applications so far as the power to appoint Overseers is concerned, and in 17 of such cases they have conferred this power on London Vestries. There are about 12 applications from local authorities in London relating to other matters and these are now being dealt with. The Board are communicating, where necessary, with the parties interested in the proposals, and their decision will be given as early as practicable.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having regard to the multitude of the Amendments placed on the paper to the Established Church (Wales) Bill, and to the fact that many of them would appear to be controversial and important, he would consider the propriety of, at the earliest possible date, proposing to this House a Resolution limiting the time for the Committee stage of the Bill, and dividing it so that on each portion of the Bill a reasonable time may be afforded for thorough discussion, such time being made known beforehand to the Committee in order that they may utilise it for the consideration of the more important Amendments rather than those of less importance, and, at the same time, giving to the Speaker or to the Chairman of Committees further power to assist the Committee by enabling the Speaker or Chairman of Committees to guide the Committee by his expression of opinion as to which were the important Amendments, and empower the enforcement of such opinion by the Speaker or Chairman; and, whether he would, in the first instance, confer with the Leader of the Opposition in this House to see if he could obtain his assistance in formulating such a Resolution to facilitate the business of this House?

This is a very large proposal in the way of altering the procedure of the House, and I cannot undertake to discuss it with the hon. and learned Member in answer to a question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in the event of the Bill for the Disestablishment and Disendowment of the Church of England in Wales becoming law, tithe will have to be paid, as at present; whether it will be collected by Government Officials, and if prompt payment upon a fixed date will be enforced; and whether, in the event of special distress, any rebate can be allowed?

The tithe rent-charge falling under the provisions of the Welsh Church Bill will continue to be payable half-yearly on the 1st of January and the 1st of July. It will be payable to and collected by, not Government Officials, but County Councils, who will be responsible for handing over to the Welsh Commissioners such amount as will be required for satisfying vested interests. There is nothing in the Bill requiring County Councils to insist on prompt payment, or preventing them from making rebates. But if the amount received by them is not sufficient to meet the requirements of the Welsh Commissioners for the satisfaction of vested interests, the deficiency will have to be met out of the County Fund. The power of a County Court to remit any tithe rent-charge exceeding two-thirds of the annual value of the land will still continue.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any, and, if so, what, provision is made in the Metropolitan Police Courts Bill for the charge of,£7,000 a-year for the police of the Houses of Parliament, and for the lump sum of £10,000 to wipe off the debt on account of alterations at Bow Street Police Court; and, if none, in what way it is proposed to provide the sums in question.

With regard to the £7,000 per annum, the amount will be provided for yearly in the Estimates. With regard to the £10,000, it is an outstanding debt which it is competent for the Treasury to write off in adjusting the capital liability of the Police Fund. There is no provision in the Bill relating to these sums; it is a matter of financial arrangement with the Treasury.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, in some districts, inspectors of weights and measures are in the habit of delegating their duties to irresponsible assistants, to the injury of the trading community; and whether such practice is legal; and, if not, can it be stopped?

I have received no information to the effect suggested in the question of my hon. Friend. If he will furnish me with full particulars of the cases which are in his mind, I will refer them for the observations of the local authority who appoint and control the Inspectors of Weights and Measures in their district. I can find nothing in the Act to authorise an Inspector to delegate his duties.

said, that, arising out of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, he wished to know whether, in the event of the local authority conniving at the subletting of inspectorships, the right hon. Gentleman will take steps to prevent that being carried on.

The Inspectors of Weights and Measures have power to appoint assistants, but they cannot delegate their functions. If such an impropriety as my hon. Friend suggests is found to have occurred, I am afraid there is no power on the part of the Board of Trade to deal with the case. The only remedy will be by fresh legislation.

asked whether, in the event of an Inspector accosting a baker in the streets and demanding an inspection of his weights, whether that would be justifiable?

That would not be a matter within my knowledge or control, but it would be one within the control of the local authorities.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Government intend to take any action upon the publication of the Bovine Tuberculosis Report; and whether those interested will be consulted regarding future legislation?

The Report has only been in the hands of the Government a few days, and there has been no time yet to come to any conclusion upon it.

asked whether the Government would consider the matter in the immediate future. The tuberculosis inquiry had been going on for some years?

The Report has been in our hands only for about a week. The Report is a very exhaustive one, and in a very short time the House will be in a position to come to a conclusion in reference to it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that much discontent exists among the officers of the Indian Army owing to their frequent super session by officers of several years' shorter service from the British Army, and the consequent ruin of their professional prospects?

I am not aware that the officers of the Indian Army are superseded by officers of several years' shorter service from the British Army. With respect to the rules of promotion in the Indian Staff Corps, I, on the 2nd of this month, replied to a question by the hon. Member for Hull.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether the recently appointed Official Solicitor will be permitted to carry on private practice; what was the rule in this respect during the term of office of his predecessor; and whether any, and, if so, what reason exists for permitting this legal official to continue his private practice when the system has been abolished in the case of the principal Law Officers?

said, that the Official Solicitor would be permitted to carry on private practice; that was the rule.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether having regard to the fact that no list even of the manors in England and Wales is extant, and that no Parliamentary Inquiry has ever been made as to their extent and jurisdiction, and to the fact that for a long series of years and at the present time lords of manors have in many instances dealt with or attempted to deal with and dispose of the "common lands" of the manor as if such lands were their private freehold, he will recommend the appointment of a Royal or Special Commission, or a Select Committee of the House, in order to obtain and lay before Parliament full information on the subject of manors in England and Wales.

It might no doubt be a good thing to have a new Domesday Book relating to the manors in England, but that seems hardly a work that could be undertaken by a Select Committee or a Royal Commission. Under the existing Parliamentary restrictions with regard to the enclosure of common lands, I do not believe it is possible now for such lands to be dealt with as private freeholds.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having regard to his statement in Debate on 21st February, 1893, that the subject of rectifying the admitted disparities in the representation of the people must be dealt with very soon, he proposes to take any steps to reduce these disparities.

I adhere to the statement made by me and referred to in the question. The Government cannot undertake to introduce a Redistribution Bill in the present Session.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can now make a statement with regard to the Mombasa-Uganda Railway, especially as to its early construction.

I am not able yet to answer the question.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Bill to make provision for the payment of the charges of the returning officers at elections will be introduced?

This Bill will be introduced later in the Session.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is the intention of the Government to provide compensation to the owners for the seizures make to tuberculised animals destroyed in the supposed interest of public health?

I have heard a good many questions about tuberculosis. I have not studied the subject myself, and I have had no proposal made to me at present as to compensation in that matter. When the proposal comes from the Treasury I shall have to consider it.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether voters, in the areas transferred from one county to another under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1894, will be transferred as to their Parliamentary votes to the new county, or whether they will be retained in the original county?

No areas are transferred from one county to another by the Local Government Act, 1894, and I presume my hon. Friend alludes to cases where such transfers are made by orders of the Local Government Board issued under the Local Government Act, 1888. If so, I may refer him to Section 92 of that Act, which provides that nothing done in pursuance of the Act shall alter the limits of any Parliamentary county, or the right of any person to be registered as a voter at any Parliamentary election.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state at what date the Local Government Board directed the Belfast Board of Guardians to give notice to the City Coroner of the death of any inmate; also the number of male and female (paid) nurses respectively in the workhouse on that date and the number of same employed there now?

The directions referred to in the Question were issued to the Guardians on the 11th December 1893. The number of paid nurses employed in the Belfast Workhouse on that date was 43 and at present the number is 72.

asked the Chief Secretary whether it was true that the Irish Government had ordered the prosecution of Mr. Michael O'Brien Dalton and other evicted tenants on the Smith-Barry estates?

Yes, it is quite true that a prosecution has been ordered.

On what ground?

I cannot carry the grounds very fully in my head, but generally speaking, if my recollection is right, the offence with which they are charged, I think to-day, is obstructing the sale of cattle and proceedings of that kind at a fair at Tipperary.

In these circumstances, would the right hon. Gentleman think it expedient to repeal the Criminal Law and Procedure Act?

These proceedings are taken under the ordinary law.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that Mr. O'Brien Dalton was the gentleman whose case was being tried when the right hon. Gentleman was in Tipperary.

I am not aware of that. I really know very little about Mr. O'Brien Dalton except that he is charged—the charge has yet to be proved—with an offence against the law.

desired to ask the Chief Secretary a question with regard to what took place yesterday in connection with the Bill for the repeal of the Crimes Act. The right hon. Gentleman stated that he would be in favour of referring the Bill to a Grand Committee, and he wished to know whether the right hon. Gentleman could state on behalf of the Government that they would afford an opportunity for the discussion and decision of the question of referring that Bill to the Grand Committee?

What I said was this, that if a Motion were made for referring this Bill in this way, I should not oppose it. I may say I should be glad if any opportunity could be found of pressing this Bill through at a further stage.

I do not gather from the answer of the right hon. Gentleman exactly what he means. Will the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues afford an opportunity for the discussion of the question?

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies—I recognise the great unfairness of asking a question of this sort without notice—[Loud cries of "Order" and "Withdraw!"]—I beg to ask whether he will be prepared to give an answer on behalf of the Government to a question as to the time to be devoted to this Bill next Monday?

indicated assent.

May I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer a question with regard to financial business? To-morrow the Resolution is put down with regard to beer and spirits. Then, perhaps, the right hon. Gentleman will say when he proposes to take the Second Reading of the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill. The right hon. Gentleman will remember that we, at his request, allowed him to take the first Resolution the other day, and I presume that on the Finance Bill there would be an understanding that we should be allowed freely to debate the Budget as a whole, without being restricted to the particular points in the Bill then under discussion. I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will see the reasonableness of that suggestion, which, I think, is in accordance with general precedent.

asked when the right hon. Gentleman proposed to take the Coal Mines Regulation Bill?

Due notice will be given before that Bill is taken. With reference to the Resolution to-morrow, after it is passed of course I shall introduce the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill. I will then endeavour to state the day—one day next week—on which that Bill is to he taken. With reference to the discussion on the Second Reading of the Bill, of course I have no particular desire to restrict discussion, but I have no means and no power to make that in order which is not in order. It does not lie in my hands at all to determine that. I have no desire to avoid discussion, but the Government must abide by the Rule of the House.

But I understand that, so far as the right hon. Gentleman is concerned, there will be no desire to interpose in that free discussion. Other wise we should be in this position, that we could never grant a Minister a Resolution on the first night, because we should lose our opportunity. It was out of deference to the right hon. Gentleman, and as a convenience to him, that we forewent our opportunity, and brought the discussion to a close on the first night, so that I hope the right hon. Gentleman will support us in securing, as far as he can, a discussion of the Budget Resolutions.

Oh, certainly. As to that point there cannot be the smallest doubt, because the matters on which the Resolutions are taken are always included in the Bill. We never take a Resolution except for a matter which is in the Bill, and, therefore, on the Second Reading of the Bill everything dealt with in the Resolution will be in order.

That is not exactly the point. The right hon. Gentleman in his Budget Speech dealt with a great many matters not in the Resolutions. If, then, we do not deal with these matters on the Resolutions on the same evening, it would appear that we should lose the ordinary opportunity of reviewing the Budget as a whole. It is in order that we should not be bound down specially to the matters contained in the Resolution, but may comment on the financial policy of the Government as a whole, that I raise the point. Otherwise it would be necessary—and I am sure that would be very undesirable—that Amendments should be moved which would give the opportunity for such a discussion. But perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will see in what way we can have that general discussion which has taken place every year.

I am quite sure the right hon. Gentleman will find I have not the smallest desire to shut out any discussion on the general financial proposals of the Government.

asked the right hon. Gentleman, with reference to the pledge he gave the House two months ago, that on an early day he would put up Army Estimates in order to allow of a general discussion, when he expected to be able to fulfil that undertaking.

asked when the right hon. Gentleman really intended to give the House an opportunity of voting the ordinary Service Estimates.

Perhaps the hon. Member will give me a little time. I am rather in hopes of being able to make proposals to the House which may have the effect of giving more time for the continuous discussion of Supply. I have always felt very strongly the disadvantage and, in fact, the impropriety of postponing Supply to the end of the Session; and if we could make some arrangement by which there was a regular weekly consideration of Supply, I think it would be a very great advantage in our proceedings. I will take means of consulting Gentlemen on both sides of the House in reference to the matter, with the view of giving effect to it.

May I ask the Leader of the House if he will state what is to be the course of business next week? He has stated that one day will be devoted to the Budget Bill. What will be taken on the other Government days?

On Monday and Tuesday we propose to go on with the Welsh Church Bill. I am not prepared to say just now what will be taken on Thursday and Friday.

said: As I stated in my answer to the hon. Member for West Belfast on the 21st of February last, the King of Amatongaland has acknowledged that, as regards that portion of his territory not under Portuguese influence, he obeys the Queen. An officer is proceeding to the country with a view to proclaiming a formal Protectorate.

I ask to be allowed to say that I wish to correct a statement which appears in The Times report of a speech I made, on Monday evening, on an Amendment in Committee on the Welsh Church Bill. [Cries of "Order."]

I understand the hon. Member does not mean to correct a report, but to correct something he has said.