said, he rose to take exception to the Second Reading. The Bill sought to deal very unjustly with Foyle College, an old-established institution in Londonderry, and with its head master.

thought he would relieve the mind of the hon. Member. He understood that the Irish Society had come to an arrangement with the headmaster, and that that gentleman's objections to the Bill had been entirely removed. He received this information from the solicitor to the Irish Society.

said that, subject to that understanding, and with the further understanding that justice would be done to the rights of parents, he would not pursue his observations. At the same time, nothing that he had yet learned enabled him to take a favourable view of this Bill, which proposed to abrogate an old-established institution, and one which had been famous for many years. The Bishop of Derry, now Primate of All Ireland, had not signed the memorial in favour of this amalgamation. He must enter his protest against the Second Reading of this Bill.

said, he had put down a Motion for the rejection of this Bill, because he thought it was not a Bill which ought to be allowed to go through unless the promoters—the Irish Society—would make provision for the secular education of children of other denominations—Roman Catholic, for instance. He was glad to say that, by friendly arrangement with the Irish Society, such provision had now been made; and he wished to be allowed on this occasion to bear his word of testimony to the more liberal spirit which the Irish Society in recent years had shown, which, he believed, was large due to the present Governor—Mr. Phillips. On the point to which the hon. Gentleman opposite had referred, he had made it his business to inquire whether, on the whole, the Bill was approved by his constituents, and so far as he was able to discover, subject to one or two small points, it did meet with the general approval of the people of Derry. He, therefore, heartily supported the Second Reading.

understood that all parties concerned had come to an arrangement upon this Bill, and, therefore, he hoped that the hon. Member for Belfast would not oppose the Second Reading

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether he is aware that on 19th January 1895, an application was made to the Local Government Board by the Urban District Council of Shepshed, Leicestershire, for permission to exercise the powers of a Parish Council; and that, except an acknowledgment from the Department of having received the application, no communication on the subject has been received by the Urban District Council; and, if he will inquire into and state the cause of such delay?

The hon. Member is under an entire misapprehension as to the facts in the case referred to. The Local Government Board, in compliance with the application of the District Council, issued an order in March of last year empowering the District Council to appoint overseers, and subsequently a further Order was issued conferring on them the powers of a Parish Council as to the appointment and revocation of the appointment of assistant overseers. With respect to the other powers applied for, the Board addressed a letter to the District Council on the 12th of March 1895, and also on the 26th of November last, asking for information as to their proposals, but the Board have not received any reply to either of these communications, and it has been assumed that the District Council were not proposing to proceed further with their application.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, if he is aware that Metropolitan Volunteer Corps are keeping, at considerable expense, all their rifles in the armouries in anticipation of the promised issue of the new weapon; and, if, as the drill season is about to commence, and arrangements are being made for class firing and prize shooting throughout the summer, he can now say definitely whether such rearmament can take place forthwith, and, failing this, if it will not be better to postpone it until November, the calling-in of rifles in the middle of the Volunteer year entailing much trouble and loss of opportunity of going through the annual course of musketry?

It is intended to rearm the whole Volunteer force with the magazine rifle, and the rearmament can commence forthwith. The new rifle can be placed at once in the hands of the whole of the Volunteers of the Home District, but before this is done the Colonels of the different corps will be consulted.

asked if the hon. Gentleman would reply to the question of which he had given him notice with regard to the ammunition for the new rifle and the price of it?

said, that question had not been entirely settled yet, but it was being considered. They would endeavour to fix the price as low as they could.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, whether anything has been done towards remedying the discrepancies between the Pension Regulations of the English and Scottish Police Forces?

As I informed the hon. Member for Dumfriesshire last Monday, inquiry has been made into this matter, but no decision has yet been arrived at. Special legislation would be necessary to carry out any changes.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, if he will state how much of the grant for the current financial year for Highlands and Islands of Scotland (Public Works, etc.) has been expended up to the present time on minor roads, and the district in which the respective minor roads are situate; if he will also state the total amount already expended out of the Government Subsidy on each minor road; and what sum it will be necessary to expend on each such minor road before it is complete?

A sum of £3,900 was provided in Estimates for 1895–96, which was subsequently increased, with Treasury sanction, to £4,200. This amount was allotted as follows:—To Inverness-shire, in respect of South Uist, Barra, and Harris districts, £2,100; to Ross-shire, for roads in Lews, £1,800, of which £600 has been issued up to this date, payment of the balance being deferred until necessary accounts of expenditure have been furnished by the County Council; and the remaining £300 to Sutherlandshire and Shetland, £150 to each. It is impossible for me to give the hon. Member more detailed information within the limits of an answer.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that the withdrawal of deposits from the Post Office Savings Bank in the ordinary course of post involves a delay of two days, which delay is considerably exceeded in many districts of Scotland and Ireland; and whether he is aware that the system of withdrawal of deposits from the Post Office Savings Bank by telegraph was said by the late Postmaster General, in his last Report, to be greatly appreciated by depositors; and, if so, whether, having regard to this fact, he is prepared to give his careful consideration to a proposal now before him, which enables depositors who cannot afford to go to the expense of telegrams to obtain small sums on demand at any Savings Bank Post Office?

, replying in the absence of Mr. HANBURY: Yes, Sir, the Postmaster General is aware that the withdrawal of deposits from the Post Office Savings Bank in ordinary course of post necessarily involves, in a great majority of cases, a delay of two days, and that in some remote districts the delay may necessarily, and unavoidably, be longer. But the Postmaster General, as I stated in reply to a previous question, is not prepared to introduce any system which would tend to convert the Post Office Savings Bank, which was intended for the encouragement of thrift, into an institution for the transaction of ordinary banking business.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether it is the case that, though previously to 1883 armourer sergeants of the Royal Marines were upon an equality with armourer sergeants of the Army, both as regards pay and pension, by a Warrant of that year the position of armourer sergeants in the Army was improved without similar advantages being granted to armourer sergeants in the Royal Marines; and, whether, having regard to the fact that, by Order in Council of 27th November, 1887, all non-commissioned officers, Royal Marines, have been assimilated with those of corresponding rank in the Army, with the exception of the armourer sergeants, he will consider the propriety of placing the armourer sergeants in the Royal Marines on an equality, both as regards pay and pension, with those of corresponding rank in the Army.

The pay of armourer sergeants in the Army was revised in the year 1883, a graduated scale commencing at 2s. 6d. a day, and rising to 6s. after ten years service, being substituted for the rates previously in force. This revised scale was not applied to Marine armourer sergeants, who receive 5s. 7½d. per diem from the commencement of their service. With respect to pension, the Order in Council of 28th November, 1887, improved, to some extent, the pensions of certain non-commissioned officers, Royal Marines, but did not assimilate their pensions with those of corresponding ranks in the Army. The classification in the two services still remains distinct. The armourer sergeant, Royal Marines, is pensioned on the scale that applies to every other sergeant of Royal Marines; and no alteration could be contemplated in his case without bringing his rate of pay into accordance with the graduated scale referred to above.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office, how many men employed in the Ordnance Store Department at Woolwich Arsenal receive less than 20s. a week, and how many men there are m the manufacturing departments of the Royal Ordnance Factories at Woolwich and Enfield who are paid less than 24s. a week; and, if the system of working the 48-hours week in six days is general in Woolwich Arsenal; if not, how many men work the 48 hours in five days?

In the Ordnance Store Department at Woolwich there are no men employed whose wages are not equivalent to 20s. a week. The number employed at that pay is 648. The system of working 48 hours a week prevails. In the Ordnance Factories at Woolwich there are 4,919 men who are rated below 24s. a week, but about 3,600 of these are on piece-work and receive more than that sum; of the remainder a considerable proportion are no longer fully competent. The system of working 48 hours in six days is general. The exceptions are night-shift men, men on special consolidated rates (as engine-drivers, stokers, and oilers), and 594 men mostly employed at the furnaces, who work 48 hours in five days a week.

I beg In ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can state how many Catholic and how many Protestant magistrates are in the polling district of Ballytrain, South Monaghan; if he is aware of any petitions from the Catholic inhabitants of the polling district of Ballytrain to have Catholic magistrates appointed; and, will he take steps to have the wishes of the petitioners carried out?

The Lord Chancellor is unable to state the number of magistrates in the polling district in question, but informs me there are ten magistrates attending the Ballybay Petty Sessions, by which this district appears to be mainly served. Of these magistrates, four are Roman Catholics, three belong to the Church of Ireland, two are Methodists, and one is a Presbyterian. The Lord Chancellor has received a communication in favour of one additional appointment to the magistracy in the locality, but, as the Ballybay Petty Sessions is well attended, he sees no necessity for an additional appointment at present.

asked, whether the right hon. Gentleman would not apply to the Lord Lieutenant for the information he required. The police of the district surely could supply the right hon. Gentleman with that information?

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, (1) whether he, is aware that the Local Government Board for Scotland refused the application of the Parish Council of West Kilbride for an alteration in the classification of rates; and, (2) whether the Government have any intention of endeavouring to institute throughout Scotland a more uniform system of classification?

The statement in the first paragraph of the hon. Member's question is correct; as regards the latter part, the Government cannot undertake to propose legislation at present on the subject of the classification of parochial rates.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been called to the clear, legible, and distinct postmarks, showing the place, date, and hour of sorting, impressed on American letters, as compared with the blurred and frequently illegible postmarks on British letters; whether he will explain why the American stamp, used for a time in the British Post Office, has been discarded; and, whether any official is interested in the sale, or employment of the stamp now used?

Several American stamps, to one of which the hon. Member refers, have from time to time been tried, but none of them have proved to be suitable for adoption, as they failed to insure adequate cancelling of the postage labels in all cases. So far as is known in the Post Office, no official is interested in the sale or employment of the stamps now used.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that a provincial tradesman, on sending out 500 or 1,000 accounts or letters, is compelled either to buy the official stationery bearing impressed stamps, or to moisten and stick on as many adhesive stamps on his own envelopes, unless he should reside in a few favoured localities; whether he will give instructions that at every sub-office a "paid" stamp shall be kept for marking batches of envelopes or other documents on payment in one sum of the postage over the counter, as is done in the Metropolis; and whether he will state at how many localities outside of London, Edinburgh and Dublin, the postage on a batch of letters may be prepaid in money?

The system under which prepayment of postage in money is accepted, on correspondence posted in considerable quantities, has lately been largely extended, and there are now 45 provincial offices at which it is in operation. It would not however, be possible to extend it to sub-offices. It is not a mere question of issuing a "paid" stamp, as an elaborate check, which can only be applied at offices of considerable size, is necessary in order that the Revenue may be properly safeguarded.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will inquire if tenders are invited by advertisements in the local papers, in respect of all contracts for county asylums in Ireland; and, if not, whether, in the interests of economy, he will communicate with the Board of Asylums in Ireland, directing tenders to be so invited for all such contracts, with a view to competition, and that all such tenders be submitted to the Governors of each Asylum?

Tenders are invited by advertisements published in the local newspapers, in respect of all contracts taken by Boards of Governors of County Asylums in Ireland, in accordance with a Privy Council Rule, and all such tenders are submitted to the Governors of each Asylum and decided by them.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether the Select Committee of the Madras Legislative Council, in reporting on the Bill, which afterwards became Act II. of 1894 (Madras Proprietary Village Service Act), stated that they had no information regarding the duties of village servants, other than the village accountant; whether the Act has been brought into force, and, if not, will he explain for what reason; and whether, according to Mr. J. D. Rees, Head Assistant Collector at Tinnevelly, and other authorities, interference with the ancient village police system has led to an increase of crime?

The Select Committee gave their want of information as a reason for leaving to the Board of Revenue the definition of the duties of the various classes of village officers, instead of attempting to define them in the Act. I am not aware that the Act has been brought into operation. The delay is presumably due to the necessity for thoroughly investigating the conditions of each locality before bringing it under the Act. Under the "ancient village system" in force in the particular locality of which Mr. Rees was writing, the villagers were in the habit of engaging as policemen professional robbers, who divided their remuneration with their caste-fellows, it was probably the suppression of this blackmailing which in Mr. Rees' opinion led to an increase of crime in 1878, but a more obvious cause is the famine of the previous year.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether his attention has been called to some correspondence published in the newspapers relative to the terms granted to Dr. Jameson's force at the time of their surrender to the Commander of the Transvaal forces on 2nd January; whether it is true that these terms were reported by the British Agent to the Transvaal Government, from information supplied by them, to be unconditional surrender; and whether there is reason to believe that the Uitlanders, then in a state of insurrection at Johannesburg, agreed also to unconditional surrender, from the belief that no reservation had been made regarding the lives of Dr. Jameson and his men?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether Sir Hercules Robinson and Sir Jacobus de Wet knew on 7th January of the terms of Dr. Jameson's surrender, and, if so, why Her Majesty's Representatives informed the British Uitlanders at Johannesburg that the lives of Dr. Jameson and his force depended upon their laying down their arms?

With my hon. Friend's permission I will, at the same time, answer the question of the hon. Member for Sheffield (Sir E. Ashmead-Bartlett) on the same subject, and I must apologise to the House—for I am afraid the answer will be rather along one. I have received the following information from Sir Hercules Robinson:—

"March 3. Number 3.—Your telegram of March 2. Neither De Wet nor I ever heard of the battlefield correspondence till now. The commandant-general reported to him in Executive Council that the surrender was unconditional, and he so informed me. All the newspaper reports of the action gave the same version, and it never occurred to me (us) for a, moment to doubt its correctness. My military secretary visited the prisoners in gaol twice, to inquire as to their health, and to obtain information required by you as to killed, and wounded, and missing. Before Government of South African Republic would give him a pass he had to undertake not to discuss with the prisioners points other than those specified, but the prisoners might have handed him the letters to and from Kronje if they thought proper. They are published here this morning in the London cablegrams.—ROBINSON."

"March 4. Number 2.—I replied yesterday to your telegram of March 2 re Jameson's surrender, and have telegraphed to Pretoria on subject, and will acquaint you with reply. Meanwhile a Renter's telegram from Pretoria is published here this morning, stating that Willoughby's account of surrender is officially contradicted. It is stated that the terms were absolutely unconditional, and had these not been accepted orders had been issued by commandant-general to resume, firing. I gather from Press extracts telegraphed from London that misapprehension appears to exist in England as to disarmament of Johannesburg without the redress of Uitlander grievances. I may, therefore, explain that an armistice had been agreed to pending my arrival. On Monday, January 6th, when I met President of the South African Republic and Executive Council, the position was this—Johannesburg was only partially armed and altogether disorganised; the city was completely at the mercy of the burgher forces surrounding it, who could have cut off the water and starved the place out in a week. This was admitted to me by an envoy from Johannesburg before I met Government of South African Republic. The Government in Executive Council insisted on unconditional surrender of arms in 24 hours, the alternative being the commencement of hostilities."

I should say here that in another telegram it is explained that the unconditional surrender of arms asked for was for the arms for which no legal permit to import had been granted. It was, therefore, a demand for the surrender of arms which had been smuggled into the country without a permit, and which were liable to be confiscated al any moment.

"I endeavoured to obtain some previous promise of concessions, but was told unconditional surrender was imperative. Government of South African Republic, as the victorious side, was in complete command of the position, and Johannesburg, as the weaker side, was powerless. It is immaterial whether the supposition then existing that Jameson's life was in danger was correct or not; the material point is that the alternative to unconditional surrender was the immediate commencement of hostilities, which would have resulted in much bloodshed and the eventual subjection of the citizens, as well as the probable destruction of the town.—ROBINSON."

"March 5, Number 1.—The following is the reply of the Government of the South African Republic to the request of Acting Agent General in the South African Republic for information respecting Jameson's surrender:—(Begins.) I have been instructed to inform you that the Government having noticed the same or a similiar published statement as the one contained in the telegram forwarded by you with reference to an alleged correspondence between Kronje and Willoughby, and not having any knowledge of matter has already telegraphed to Kronje for an accurate and full report, and if any correspondence was carried on by them to forward copies thereof to Pretoria, and requesting him also to come personally to Pretoria. His telegraphic reply is not sufficiently circumstantial, but, so far as it goes, he does not agree with what appears to have been published in the newspapers. His arrival must, therefore, be awaited, when I shall report further. In the meanwhile it appears from the correspondence relating to this matter that Commandant Trichardt telegraphed to the commandant-general on January 2 that his burghers were 1,250 yards from the enemy, that he had ceased firing, and had hoisted the white flag. The answer to Commander Trichardt appears to have been as follows:—They must lay down their arms and surrender unconditionally. If not, then the firing proceeds. Give them not more than five minutes to decide whether they will surrender or not, otherwise the firing proceeds. Should they surrender, take everything, then in charge bring them to Krugersdorp, and the officers to Pretoria. Disarm them first. (End.)—ROBINSON."

On a review of the whole matter, it appears to me to result—First, that the commandants of the Boer forces had distinct orders to insist on unconditional surrender; second, that, notwithstanding this, one commandant, probably Mr. Kronje, did offer to Sir John Willoughby and his men that their lives should be spared if they laid down their arms and promised an indemnity; third, that, in so doing, he exceeded his authority, and the President now states that he knew nothing of the matter. I have had up to the present time no reason to doubt the good faith of the President—[cheers]—who is, I believe, sincerely anxious to find a satisfactory settlement of all pending questions, but he has great difficulties to contend with from his own people, and my negotiations with him are likely to be prejudiced by the imputations of bad faith which have found credence with persons of high authority in this country, and which are, I believe, groundless, and certainly not sustained by any evidence in my possession. [Cheers.]

Arising out of the Question, may I venture to ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that after the letter which has been published, in which the Commandant of the Transvaal forces agreed to grant the lives of Dr. Jameson's force in return for their surrender, Sir John Willoughby, in order to confirm that, wrote a letter addressed——

Order, order! This does not arise out of the Question on the Paper, which has been fully answered. Any other Question must be put on the paper.

I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not the universal practice that the pledge of a commanding officer in the field——

Order, order! That is a general Question which must be put down on the Paper, and does not arise out of this.

It arises out of my Question. ["Order, order!"]

I have looked at the hon. Member's Question, and I am of opinion that this does not arise out of it.

I am going to ask the right hon. Gentleman a Question on another point—namely, whether he can explain to the House why it was that neither Sir Hercules Robinson nor Sir Jacobus De Wet took any steps to inform themselves of the terms of the surrender—["Hear, hear!"]—it not being open to Dr. Jameson or his officers to communicate outside——

I must ask the hon. Member to give notice of any further Question on this subject. The Question on the Paper has been fully answered. [Cheers.]

I think, Sir, this is my Question on the Paper.

I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman a Question strictly arising out of the Question on the Paper, which is if he can tell us who sent the telegram he has quoted to Commandant Prichardt?

Undoubtedly the Government of the South African Republic.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) that having regard to his statement that it is not the intention of the Government to propose legislation this Session to amend the Grand Jury Laws of Ireland, whether he will issue instructions to the several High Sheriffs of Ireland to see that the necessary legal qualification is possessed by each person sworn in on the several Grand Juries throughout the country, and that, when arranging the names of those he wishes called on the Grand panel, due consideration shall be given to the names of those who represent the majority of the people; (2) if he will take such steps as may appear to him sufficient to guard against a land agent sitting on the same jury as the landlord for whom he acts, except when such land agent possesses the necessary legal qualification entirely apart from his position as agent to a local landlord; and also, in the case of father and son sitting at the same time on the same jury, unless the son is possessed in his own right of the necessary legal qualification; and (3) if he will lay upon the Table of the House a Return showing the names of the gentlemen sworn in on the Carlow Grand Jury during the last three years, giving their occupation or calling, the valuation of any property possessed by them in that county, and any other qualification that they may have entitling them to act as Grand Jurors?

The Government have no power to issue instructions as suggested in the first paragraph of the question. The qualifications of Grand Jurors are fixed by Statute, and the Executive has no voice or control in the matter of choosing the members. The Sheriff' is at liberty to select whomsoever he likes, provided there is one representative from each Barony, and that the individual selected is in other respects qualified. As regards the third paragraph, neither the Grand Jury nor its officers are under the control of the Government, and the Government has no means of calling for the Return suggested.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman was aware that the Clerk of the Crown and Peace had the records of the Grand Jurors, and if application would be made to that official?

replied that he would make inquiries.

would like the right hon. Gentleman to answer the first paragraph of the question—namely, whether it was the intention of the Government to amend the Grand Jury Laws of Ireland?

did not at present propose to bring in a Bill to deal with the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that upon more than one occasion when contract boots have not been issued to the Metropolitan Police, a sum equal to the contract price per pair was paid to each constable; and whether any difficulty was experienced in connection with the carrying out of this arrangement?

Yes, considerable difficulty was experienced on each of the rare occasions on which it was found necessary to make an allowance to the members of the Force in lieu of boots.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that Her Majesty's Consul at Antwerp has for some considerable time given the exclusive privilege to two men, named Bethell and Williams, to engage and supply seamen to British ships requiring crews in that port; whether he is aware that these two men supply some 10,000 seamen par annum; that they charge each seaman a shipping fee varying from 10s. to £1, and that they are allowed in Her Majesty's Consulate at Antwerp, where they conduct the business of signing on the seamen in the absence of Her Majesty's Consul, and that they refuse to sign any seamen who object to pay their fees; and whether he purposes to take any steps to cause an inquiry to be held into these practices?

The system of employing shipping masters in connection with the Consulate General at Antwerp has, I understand, been in force since the beginning of the century. Only men approved by the Consul General are allowed in his offices, but I do not know their present number, or their names. The number of seamen engaged at Antwerp during the year 1895 was 11,204. Probably the greater number were engaged through the shipping masters, but, although it is customary, it is in no way obligatory for the master of a British ship to employ a shipping master to procure him a crew, nor is it necessary for a seaman, unless so disposed, to sign articles at the Consulate General through the intermediary of a shipping master. The fees charged vary, I am told, from 5 francs to 12 francs, according to the rate of wages. The approved shipping masters allowed in the Consulate assist in the work of engagement, but I have no reason to believe that the actual engagements do not take place in the presence of a Consular officer, as required by the Act, of Parliament. The matter is one which, in my opinion, requires investigation, and I propose to direct an inquiry into the subject.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, whether the Secretary for Scotland has received a memorial from the Committee for the promotion of a Fishery Boat Refuge for the Moray Firth; whether the facts alleged in the memorial are correct as regards the magnitude of the interests involved, the dangers to life and property, the inadequacy of existing harbours for refuge purposes, and the advantages of Craigenroan as the site for a boat refuge, from both an engineering and a financial point of view; whether the reports on Craigenroan by the engineers of the Fishery Board and of the Government are unconditionally favourable; and, what steps the Government propose to take in order to deal with this question and to give effect to the recommendation, dated 22nd July 1894, of a Committee of this House, which declared that it falls entirely within the province of the Government to provide the much-needed refuge in these districts?

The Secretary for Scotland has received the memorial referred to, and has no reason to doubt the accuracy of the facts therein stated. The engineers of the Fishery Board and of the Government have reported favourably on the advantages of Craigenroan as a site for a harbour of refuge. The estimated cost of such a harbour, however, is £20,000, and the Fishery Board cannot undertake out of their limited resources to incur so large an expenditure.

May I ask, whether the recommendation of the Committee was not that this should be treated as a National and not a Fishery Board Grant?

I have referred to the Report of the Committee, and I think the fourth paragraph of the Question is hardly an accurate representation of what they recommended. What they substantially said was that it would be so costly that it would require to be done by the Government if done at all. I do not think, however, that Craigenroan is in the district where the Committee said there was a pressing necessity for a harbour.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether the Irish Board of Works employed an engineer from London to hold engineering inquires in Ireland under the Tramways (Ireland) Acts, thereby, putting promoters to extra expense; (2) whether this extra expense is to be borne by the Board of Works or the companies promoting railways or tramways; (3) whether these inquiries were efficiently carried out heretofore by engineers practising in Ireland, and was there any valid reason for departing from that practice in favour of gentlemen practising in England; and (4) whether, when responsible offices in Ireland are vacant requiring engineering skill, he will, if possible, appoint Irish engineers.

An engineer—who is an Irishman and who was engineer to the Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland—who has had many years' experience in Ireland, and who now practices in both Ireland and England, has lately held inquiries for the Board of Works under the Tramways Act, but this has not caused the promoters any extra expense, as, in the case mentioned, the charges have been made as from Dublin. The Board of Works state that there has been no departure from previous practice in the present instance. The Question contained in the last paragraph is too general to allow any pledge to be given off-hand.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the case of Owen Murligan, recently removed to the Mullingar Workhouse by the Glasgow Parish Authorities; is he aware that Murligan had been for over 40 years residing out of Ireland, 30 years of that time having been spent in Scotland and England, and 10 years in India as a soldier; and whether, having regard to the hardship caused to Irish unions by the duty of relieving and maintaining those destitute persons who have worked for the greater portion of their lives in other countries, he will introduce legislation altering the law of settlement so far as it relates to those cases?

I have seen a report in reference to the removal of this man; but on the general question I cannot, at present, add to the replies which I have repeatedly given to similar inquiries addressed to me. The matter is still the subject of communication with the English and Scotch authorities.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he is aware that objection is widely taken to the trial, at ordinary police courts, of cases not properly of a criminal nature, though involving penalties, such as summonses under the Education Acts for the non-attendance of children at school; if he is aware that, under the present system, the hearing of school-attendance cases frequently involves the presence of respectable women and young children at police courts; and, in view of the fact that the Royal Commission on the Amalgamation of the City and County of London recommended that the trial of such cases should take place elsewhere than at ordinary police courts, whether he proposes to take the necessary steps to remove the hearing of such cases to places other than police courts?

I am not aware that any widespread objection exists to the present system. In connection with school-attendance cases, the presence of women and children may, no doubt, be required at the courts; but it is the general practice to hear these cases at a time of the day when there is little, if any, criminal business going on, and at the time appointed for them to take them before any other business. This practice works well, and I am not prepared to introduce the legislation which would be necessary for the removal of these casas to other than police courts.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the amount of compensation to be paid by the Russian Government to the owners of British sealing vessels unlawfully seined by Russian cruisers in the Behring Sea, in 1892, has yet been settled and paid; and, if so, what is the amount in each case; if not, whether he can say when a settlement of this matter is likely to be arrived at?

The claims in question, have not yet been settled. Much time has necessarily been occupied in collecting and examining the evidence and in preparing the statements of claim, but the matter is in a forward state, and it is hoped shortly to present the claims to the Russian Government.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, whether Her Majesty's Government have given their attention to the Order in Council, of 4th June 1870, which provides that, in cases where the chief of a Department and the Lords of the Treasury agree to consider that qualifications for certain posts in the Civil Service are partly professional or peculiar and not ordinarily to be acquired in the Civil Service, the Civil Service Commissioners are empowered to dispense with examination, wholly or partially, and to grant a certificate of qualification without examination; whether the number of cases in which such certificates have been granted without any examination whatever, has amounted during the years from 1870 to 1894 to 3,979; and, whether he will agree to give a Return showing the number, nature, and salary of the appointments in respect of which the Civil Service Commissioners have exercised the dispensing power given to them by the Order in Council of 4th June 1870, together with the ages of the candidates concerned?

The Government has given attention to the Order in Council referred to. The hon. Member has correctly stated the number of certificates issued under Clause VII. of the Order in Council since 1870. A Return extending over the entire period of 25 years would entail a very large amount of clerical labour, but a Return will be prepared for the last three years which will afford full information as to the circumstances in which certificates under Clause VII. are issued.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the structural improvements in Westport Workhouse, if he can state what improvements are urgently required, and what is the estimated cost of such improvements; and, if he will suggest that, considering the poor state of the ratepayers, only the most urgent improvements will be undertaken at present?

The Local Government Board now state it is not intended to require the Guardians at present to undertake any structural alterations in the workhouse, but that they will ask the Guardians to carry out certain improvements which are urgently needed for the comfort of the sick and infirm inmates, such as a supply of bedsteads and mattresses, better sanitary appliances, etc., all of which have been recommended by the medical officer of the workhouse. It is believed that the cost of these improvements will not be large.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) how many evicted tenants (not emigrated or dead) are now on the roadside and altogether out of their holdings; and, (2) whether, under the hopelessness of their being reinstated, he would consider the advisability of the Government planting them on other lands in Ireland on one large tract, bought or rented by Government, of land which is now waste but good?

There are no official records giving the information asked for by the first paragraph of the hon. Gentleman's question; and as to the second part of the question, without entering into other objections that might be raised to his proposal, I may perhaps remind him that an experiment, having for its object the planting of tenants on a purchased tract of land, was attempted to be carried out some years ago in Ireland with land that was not waste to begin with, but that the experiment ended in complete failure.

Was not the late Mr. Parnell the prinpal director? [Nationalist cries of "Order" and "Shame!"]

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) whether any plan could be devised to prevent the Wicklow Copper Mines (not worked for 40 years) from polluting and poisoning the Rivers Avonmore and Avonbeg, flowing as one river into the sea at Arklow, County Wicklow, with pumpings from their disused mines, which is destroying valuable salmon fisheries, and injuring tourist and railway traffic; (2) if he will cause inquiry to be made whether the landlords owning property along the banks of the river would give their land free for a separate channel to be made for the poisoned water to the sea; and, (3) would the Government advance money for the work, during distressed periods, for the people until the work was completed?

As to the first paragraph it seems to be a question of law whether or not the owners of the mines could be compelled to desist, from discharging polluted waters into the rivers, thus throwing on them the onus of providing means for getting rid of the polluting discharges. With regard to the second and third paragraphs, this appears to be a matter in which those locally interested should first move. If a practicable scheme be laid before Government it would be considered.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he could facilitate the transportation, by the Parcel Post system, of perishable products, such as tender fruits, flowers, and vegetables, to London from Ireland, products which are known to bring profitable prices from that country, to cheapen the rates of those products, in order (as the railways will not) to encourage their growth by farmers and others; and whether a larger Parcel Post box or basket, holding about five hundredweight or more, could be made on wheels, the same as the American system, to wheel on to the rail way waggons, or on to the steamers, without the necessity of handling too often the small packages of perishable produce until it reaches destination, and thus enable it to be delivered to London Markets in good condition, whereas on the old system it is impossible to get perishable products to market on account of Ireland being a damp climate?

The whole question raised by the hon. Member is engaging the attention of the Postmaster General, but the difficulties connected with it are very great, and there are grave objections to the establishment of preferential rates for particular kinds of produce. Special receptacles for parcels of perishable produce, of the size and kind suggested by the hon. Member, have not hitherto been found necessary, but if there were a large development of this particular traffic, the Department would, of course, take all necessary means for its safe transmission.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if the Government could grant the various Poor Law Unions, as well as the lunatic asylums, money to buy or rent 50 acres of laud adjoining or near the Unions, in order that farming and market gardening under technical and practical instruction may be carried on by able paupers?

I am not aware of any statutory authority which would enable the Government to make grants to the Guardians of Poor Law Unions in Ireland for the purpose indicated in the Question. Power is given by the Poor Relief Acts to purchase or hire land, not exceeding 12 acres, in connection with Workhouses, and also to purchase or hire additional land not exceeding 25 acres, for the purpose of instructing children in Workhouses in the cultivation of land. In such cases the Guardians pay the rent or purchase money of the land taken. The majority of the able-bodied inmates in Workhouses are casuals, or tramps, who only remain for a night or so, and who could not, therefore, be employed in agricultural work, and in most Workhouses the ordinary able-bodied inmates are so few in number that considerable difficulty exists at the present time in cultivating the land already attached to Workhouses. No representations have reached the Local Government Board from Boards of Guardians indicating that any necessity exists for making further provision for the agricultural training of paupers as suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he cause inquiries to be made as to why public houses in country districts in Ireland are not watched more closely by the police or Inspectors to prevent them selling bad or adulterated liquor?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will cause inquiries to be made into the alleged sale of liquors in low class public houses in some of the country parts of Ireland so badly adulterated as to be dangerous to the public health and injurious to the interests of one of the most important Irish industries; and whether any system of inspection for the purpose of detecting and punishing adulteration at present exists?

It is the duty of those members of the Constabulary, who have been appointed by local authorities to carry out the provisions of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, to make every effort to detect the sale of adulterated liquor, and when there is reason to suspect that adulterated liquor is being sold, samples are at once submitted for analysis, and if it appears that an offence has been committed, proceedings are at once taken. So far as the Inspector General is aware, this duty has been carried out in a satisfactory manner, and no complaint has been made to him on the subject. If, however, he is informed of any case in which the law is not enforced, he will inquire into it.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether certain temporary staff posts in some departments of the Civil Service, to which clerks of the second division have been appointed, have had attached to them the condition that the recipient shall "mark time" before receiving his first increment of salary, for a period in each case equivalent to that which would have elapsed without promotion and in the ordinary course between the date of his promotion and the attainment of the initial salary of the staff post; whether the six second division staff posts in the Bankruptcy Department of the Board of Trade, scheduled in the Civil Service Estimates for the year 1896–7 (Class II., Sub-Head A. I.) as being two at £210, three at £250, and one at £270, are subject to this condition; whether the three other second division staff posts in the same office, included under the same sub-head, are not so subject, but have attached to them an annual increment of salary from the date of first appointment; and, if so, what is the reason of this inequality of treatment; whether the system of withholding from persons promoted to superior posts in the clerical departments of the Civil Service the advantage usually attaching to such promotion of an annual increment of salary was ever followed to any appreciable extent prior to the Session of 1893 or 1894, and whether it is intended to apply it to other promotions of a similar character in other departments; and whether he will take steps to secure that staff posts to which second division clerks are promoted should at least be of equal value to appointments to the upper grade of the second division, viz., £250 to £350 a year by annual increments of £10?

Temporary staff posts of the second division are common to all departments. They were first created in view of the fact that the division, then newly formed, was mainly composed of junior officers. The posts will die out as the division reaches its normal development. The temporary salary is fixed in each case with strict reference to the nature of the particular work to be done. For instance, if a junior clerk is necessarily employed on work worth £200 a year, he is at once paid at that rate, and continues to receive it until he would have reached £200 in ordinary course, when he proceeds by annual increments to the maximum of the scale of the division. On the other hand, there are cases in which the work is more suitably remunerated by a scale. The suggestion in the Question that the salaries of all staff posts of the second division should be at least £250 rising by £10 to £350 would be very extravagant and altogether beyond the requirements of the case.

On behalf of the hon. Member for East Galway, Mr. J. ROCHE, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the escort of eight policemen which accompanied the sheriffs' bailiff to the lands of Patrick M'Inerney, of Moreens West, near Carrigaholt, county Clare, to execute decree for the recovery of arrears of rent and £2 15s. costs, whether he can state what expenses were incurred by supplying this escort of constabulary, and also on whose application the escort was granted; and, whether, considering that all the arrears of rent had been paid before the decree was obtained, and that only the costs of decree were claimed, he will suggest that proper inquiry be made before a force of constabulary is sent out on such duty?

The only expense incurred by the constabulary in supplying protection to the sheriffs' bailiff in the execution of the civil bill decree in this case, was the sum of l2s. for the hire of a car. The police escort was furnished on the requisition of the sheriff. As regards the second part of the Question, I have already stated that the police had no alternative but to afford protection to the sheriffs officer in the execution of the decree. Even had the police been previously aware that the arrears of rent had been paid by M'Inerey, they would still have been bound to comply with the sheriffs requisition, and the most they could have done in such event would have been to represent the fact to the proper quarter.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will cause to be printed as a Parliamentary Paper the correspondence between his Department and the representative Societies of Shipowners and Engineers and others upon the subject of apprenticeship for applicants for Board of Trade certificates of competency as marine engineers; whether he will now issue the altered Regulations promised by the Board's Circular Letter of the 4th June, 1894, so that the period of apprenticeship required on the part of such applicants may be raised from three years to five years?

If the hon. Member will move for the correspondence to which he refers no objection will be raised on behalf of the Board of Trade to its presentation. The question of issuing revised regulations respecting the period of apprenticeship of marine engineers has not been lost sight of, but has been held over pending the consideration of some subsidiary points that have arisen.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the recent steps taken by landlords in Mid Cork to deal with arrears of rent, and, especially to the practice of issuing writs in the superior courts, which involves much greater costs to the tenant than the ordinary process in the county courts; and whether, in view of the exceptional agricultural depression existing in Ireland as well as England, any steps will be taken or advised to prevent further depopulation in Ireland?

I am not aware that the landlords of Mid Cork have recently adopted any new or unusual method for the recovery of arrears of rent; and indeed so far as the police can ascertain proceedings in the superior courts for the recovery of arrears of rent in Mid Cork appear lately not to have been resorted to so frequently as formerly. In only five cases during the past seven months has the sheriff applied for protection in the execution of writs of the superior courts, in this area.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland with reference to the expenses of the ex-officio inspectors of weights and measures in county Derry; (1) whether he is aware that inspectors are obliged to advance the expenses out of their own pockets, and are entitled to be paid at the end of each quarter by the treasurer for the Grand Jury of the county; (2) whether the accounts furnished to the treasurer for the quarter ending 30th September last have not yet been paid to the inspectors, notwithstanding that the accounts for the quarter ending 31st December last have been settled; and (3) whether, considering that several applications have been made and publicity given to the matter in the Press, and the hardship to the inspectors in being so long kept out of the moneys so advanced by them, he will make inquiry as to the cause of delay in payment?

The practice is as stated in the first paragraph. I understand that it is the fact that although the accounts of these inspectors for the December quarter have all been paid, a number of the accounts for the previous quarter have not yet been paid. The unpaid accounts amount to £30. The delay in this matter has been due, I believe, to a mistake made in the office of the County Treasurer who cannot now be put into funds to meet the expenses until the approaching Assizes at Derry on the 23rd instant.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the complaints made by the promoters of land meetings in Ulster as to the interference of the Constabulary in coming to make inquiries about the object of such meetings, and the names, numbers, religions, and political views of the persons attending them; whether reports are sent to Dublin Castle, and by whom directions to attend these meetings are given to the Constabulary; and, whether he can state if there is any such interference with meetings in England?

My attention has not been drawn to the complaints stated to have been made by the promoters of these meetings in reference to the action of the Constabulary, nor have any such complaints been made, so far as I can ascertain, to the responsible Constabulary authorities. In the ordinary discharge of their duties, the police have made inquiry as to the objects of demonstrations or meetings held in the north of Ireland, and such inquiry is essential to enable them to take any steps that may be considered necessary for the preservation of the peace. Reports are not as a rule sent, to Dublin beforehand unless disturbance of the public peace is anticipated and time permits. I am not in a position to answer the concluding paragraph.

asked if these inquiries were often made by the police immediately after the meeting had been held.

If made afterwards obviously they cannot be for the purpose of forming an opinion beforehand.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware of the number of representative meetings recently held in Castlewellan, Hilltown, Newry, and in other districts in county Down, in favour of a scheme for constructing a light railway between Newry and Castlewellan; and, whether, considering the necessity for opening up this portion of county Down by means of a line of railway, he will make inquiry as to what can be done in the matter.

Such meetings have been held, and the matter will be considered in connection with other proposals of a similar character.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Patrick M'Quaide, of Gola, county Monaghan, a prisoner in Dundalk Gaol, on a charge of simple trespass upon his evicted farm, who has not been brought to trial; and, can he state what grounds exist for his detention in prison; why he was not arraigned at petty sessions; and who is the judge responsible for his arrest and imprisonment?

I replied to a similar question addressed to me on this matter on the 25th February, and have nothing further to add to the answer which I then gave.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he is aware that Owen Treanor, an old man close upon 70 years of age, an evicted tenant of the Scottish Provident Association, in the barony of Truagh, was arrested on the 18th of August last, and kept imprisoned in Dundalk Gaol till the 31st of January without being brought to trial; was this man's offence, a trespass on his evicted farm, punishable at petty sessions by a small fine; who was the judge who committed him to prison; and, is there any means of compensating this man for the serious injury done to him by this proceeding?

I am informed that the property on which this man was a tenant is in Chancery, and that he was committed to prison for contempt under an Order of the Court of Chancery, having been found in forcible possession of the house and farm from which he had been evicted. He subsequently purged his contempt by agreeing to give up possession, and was discharged from prison on an Order of the Court of Chancery on the 28th January last. The responsibility for the proceedings in such cases rests altogether with that Court, and the Executive have no power to interfere.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he is aware that the railway station of Mountjoy, which formerly afforded travelling facilities to Omagh and a thickly-populated section of country, has been closed for a number of years; is he also aware that public meetings have been held protesting against the refusal of the directors of the Great Northern Railway Company of Ireland to re-open this station to the travelling public; and, will an effort be made to induce this prosperous railway company to give to the inhabitants of Mount joy and Omagh the accommodation so much needed?

I have communicated with the Great Northern Railway Company of Ireland, who inform me that a station was originally provided there by the Londonderry and Enniskillen Railway Company, but it was found to yield results insufficient to justify its being continued, and it was abolished by that company upwards of 30 years ago. Some years afterwards (about 1872) another station was opened there, not far from the site of the former one, which was kept open until 1879, but, as the gross receipts did not amount to £100 per annum, it was closed. The directors have recently given consideration to a further application for the re-opening of the station, but, judging from previous experience and full inquiries which they have made as to the present probabilities of the amount of accommodation such a station would afford, they are of opinion that they would not be justified in complying with the request.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether he is now able to lay upon the Table any Papers or Correspondence relating to the disputes between the Government of India and the Maharaja of Jhalwar; whether he is able to state if the telegram from Calcutta, published in yesterday's Daily Chronicle, announcing the deposition of the Prince, is correct; whether, in accordance with the pledge of the Government given on the 25th ultimo, the Maharaja will have every opportunity of submitting his reply to the charges made against him; and, whether these charges will be made the subject of a public inquiry, in which the Maharaja will have the advantage of legal advice?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether it is true, as reported, that the Maharaja of Jhalwar has been deposed?

I must invite the attention of the hon. Member to my reply on the 24th of February. Until I have received by mail the final orders and papers from the Indian Government relating to the case, I cannot say what papers I can produce. I am informed by telegram that the Inquiry has resulted in the deposition of the Maharaja Rana, and that this decision has been made known in Jhalwar. The charges brought against His Highness have been fully explained to him, and his written answers received. There has been no restriction upon his seeking advice, and the Inquiry has been conducted according to the usual practice, which I am not disposed to modify.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, whether the assistant clerks in the Statistical Office of the Customs receive less annual increment of salary than temporary boy-copyists in the same office, and less annual leave than the messengers; if the sick leave without loss of pay allowed to them is less than what is allowed to any permanent class in the Customs service; and whether he can see his way clear to remedy the matters complained of?

The salary, increment, and annual leave of assistant clerks or abstractors in the Customs are the same as those of their class throughout the service. The increment of boy-copyists is higher because their entire period of service is limited to six years. As regards the sick leave of abstractors on full pay, the Secretary to the Treasury is making inquiry. Considering the rudimentary nature of the work, the Treasury is of opinion that the conditions of their employment are sufficiently favourable.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, when was the last of the ordinary visitations paid to the Queen's College, Cork, which it is provided by the statutes of the Queen's Colleges, Ireland, should take place triennially; and, if not within the past three years, will measures be taken to have one immediately, so as to conform in some way to the terms of the statutes?

I understand that the last ordinary visitation of the Board of Visitors to this college was held in March, 1879, though it appears extraordinary visitations have since been held from time to time, the latest in May, 1894. It is not known why the ordinary visitations were discontinued, but as the initiative with respect to these visitations rests with the Board of Visitors, their attention will be drawn to the matter.

May I ask who the visitors are?

I have not the list before me, but I believe the Chief Secretary is one of them.

Then are we to understand that the right hon. Gentlemen will attend to their duties in future?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the attention of the Postmaster General has been called to the fact that, on the 5th and 19th February, and the 1st March 1896, mails arriving at Plymouth after 8 p.m. have been there detained for three and a half hours, four and a half hours, and seven hours respectively, before being dispatched to London, and have not been delivered in the city until late in the afternoon of the following day, and whether, in order to prevent serious inconvenience and loss to merchants in London and elsewhere, he will revert to the practice followed up to a recent period of dispatching such mails by special trains?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he can explain why the South African mails by the Union steamer Mexican, which reached Plymouth at 7.30 p.m. on Sunday, the 1st instant, were not delivered in London until the afternoon of Monday, the 2nd instant; whether he is aware that frequent delays have occurred of late, and will he take steps to prevent a recurrence?

It is thought well to answer this Question and that of the hon. Member for Paisley (No. 58) together. The principle governing the employment of special trains for the conveyance from Plymouth of mails landed at that port has been explained in this House in answer to similar Questions, namely, to use special trains when, by such means and no other, an interval for reply by the next outgoing mail can be afforded. On the three dates cited in the first Question there certainly was an interval of some hours before the mails were dispatched from Plymouth, but in on case was there any urgency on account of the approaching departure of an outgoing mail. On each occasion the Packet arrived before she was due, and there was nearly a week's interval for reply. Although on the first two days referred to the letters were delivered late in the afternoon, on the third day, viz., that on which the mails were brought by the Mexican, they were sent out at 2.5 p.m., and, therefore, delivered during business hours in the city. It is not thought that the circumstances would warrant a return to the former indiscriminate use of special trains.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, whether, with regard to the due supply of cordite for the purposes of the Army and Navy, the Director of Contracts for Warlike Stores is able to provide all the raw material employed in its manufacture from products of British origin; and, if not, has due preparation been made for the supply of the requisite raw material from the United Kingdom in case of the outbreak of war?

Almost all the components of cordite can be obtained in the country in any quantity likely to be required. Where this is not the case, the necessity of providing a stock is recognised, and arrangements are made accordingly.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland, whether he is aware that, owing to the default of a county cess collector in the county of Donegal, a number of tenants in the barony of Boylagh, in that county, have for the past three or four years been harassed by demands and prosecutions on the part of the Grand Jury for arrears of cess which the tenants contend they do not owe, and for the payment of which they have in several cases produced receipts; and, whether it is in his power to prevent a continuance of the proceedings referred to?

The facts are not quite correctly stated in the Question. In the summer of 1893 the out-going county cess collector returned a list of defaulters, whose cess he swore he was unable to collect. The Grand Jury thereupon, acting in pursuance of the statute represented the sum of £610 in respect of these arrears, and the same having been added to the new levy, was included in the warrants to the succeeding cess collector. I have not been able to ascertain whether any receipts were, in fact, produced by alleged defaulters who were sued, but if they were produced, or payments to the ex-collector otherwise proved, the claim of the collector who sued would be dismissed with costs. In any case, I have no power to interfere with the Grand Jury or their officer in any proceedings taken by them to recover county cess.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Londonderry, Mr. F. VESEY KNOX, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) what was the total amount of guaranteed land stock issued on the 31st December last; (2) how much of this stock was held by the National Debt Commissioners; and (3), how the figure of £2,099,000, given by the Registrar General in page 15 of his last Return as the amount of Guaranteed Land Stock held in Ireland, was arrived at?

According to the Land Commission the total amount of Guaranteed Land Stock issued to the 31st December, 1895, was £2,100,132 10s. 7d. The sum of £2,099,000 mentioned in the recent Return of the Registrar General, to which reference is made in the Question, was furnished to him by the Governor of the Bank of Ireland. There is a difference of a little over £1,000 between these two amounts, arising, I understand, from the fact that some of the Stock has been cancelled. With regard to the second paragraph, I am informed by the National Debt Commissioners that the amount of Guaranteed Land Stock held by them on the 31st December last was £914,905 10s.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is now prepared to give an answer to the Petition forwarded on 27th September 1895, by seven sorting clerks of the Sorting Office, General Post Office, Dublin, with reference to the delay in the granting of their appointments, and claiming that their appointments should date from the time of nomination, and that all increments to which in that time they would have been entitled be allowed?

This matter is still under the consideration of the Treasury, who have had to call for further information on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Patrick Lynch, late of the 108th Regiment, who gave 18 years' service, 15 years of it in India, and was engaged in battle at Bandah and several other engagements, was awarded four good conduct badges and the Indian medal and clasp, and discharged in 1872 on account of disease, the result of long service in India, on a pension, of nine-pence per day; whether he is aware that Lynch, being unable to work or support himself on his pension, was obliged to go into the Kilkenny Workhouse, where he is at present; and whether, in consideration of his good character and distinguished service, he will increase Lynch's pension to enable him to support himself outside the workhouse?

This case will be referred for inquiry by the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he is aware that certain Parish Councils are in the habit of sending, as the Parochial Boards have previously done, pauper patients suffering from incurable disease to poor-houses where no regular nurse is kept; and if he will make an order that no such case be received into a poor-house unless a certified nurse is on the premises?

All parishes having an interest in a poor-house are entitled to send paupers there, and the Statute does not empower the Local Government Board to control this right. The Board have endeavoured to encourage trained sick nursing by all the means at their disposal, and have obtained sanction to devote a portion of their medical grant to that object; but they have not the power to compel any Poor-house Committee to provide trained nurses in any particular case.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when the Royal Commission on Vaccination last sat to take evidence; how many times its members have sat to consider their Report; when they last sat for that purpose; and, what date, if any, is fixed for their next meeting.

I am informed that the Commission last sat to take evidence orally on December 13, 1893, but that since then they have procured and considered much valuable written evidence. I am also informed that they have held 12 meetings for the consideration of their Report, besides informal meetings of various members for the elucidation of certain points before their consideration by the general body of Commissioners. The last meeting was yesterday; the next is on Wednesday, the 11th inst. I may add that the time of many of the Commissioners is largely occupied by other important duties. They have given their labour ungrudgingly to the work of the Commission, and they are most earnestly desirous to bring their labours to a close.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) if a memorial was presented some time ago to the Congested Districts Board asking them to construct a boat-slip at the Curragh Hole, Linsport, on the shores of Lough Swilly, together with an estimate, sent to the Board at the same time, showing that the work could be constructed for about £80; (2) is he aware that this port is much frequented by fishing boats; that at present there is no protection for boats frequenting this small port; that on Friday, 31st January last, two girls were drowned at or near this place; and that the jury at the coroner's inquest were of opinion that had there been a boatslip in existence, the girls would probably have been saved; and, (3) whether he will direct an inquiry as to the advisability of having a boat-slip erected, and to the possibility of finding means to make or aid in making such a boat-slip?

The memorial referred to in the first paragraph was received by the Congested Districts Board. The Board have no information to show that an important fishing industry is carried on at Linsport, and have felt unable to accede to the application for the construction of a boat-slip there.

I beg-to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War, whether, by Order in Council, Clause 1, sub-section 1, and Clause 2, sub-sections (a) and (b) of the Military Manœuvres Bill would be held to apply to any unenclosed land or authorised enclosed lands in the New Forest; and whether the common rights and interests of the inhabitants of that district could and would be recognised under the Act or any proceedings under the said Act?

It is not proposed to treat the New Forest differently from other localities. Should at any time military operations be necessary in the New Forest, the commoners and inhabitants of that district will receive the same protection and compensation for any damage as private individuals.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, (1) whether he has yet received information from the Transvaal as to the existence of any law there anologous to our habeas corpus law, and as to the nature and terms of the deposit of £10,000 by each of the four British subjects (Messrs. Phillips, Farrer, Rhodes, and Fitzpatrick); (2) whether they are still in custody or out on bail, and what extent of liberty of attending to their own affairs they at present have; and, (3) whether it is true that a witness on their trial was threatened with imprisonment and actually fined for not stating what his ideas were on a certain subject?

In answer to the second Question, I am informed that the four accused persons referred to occupy a comfortable furnished private house with grounds in the healthy part of the suburbs, and are allowed to walk about the premises freely without escort, and that anyone may visit them without a pass. They are also allowed to drive out in carriages or on bicycles daily—[laughter]—in company with a lieutenant of police [Renewed laughter.] I have endeavoured and am still endeavouring to do all in my power to secure ameliorations in their conditions; but it must be remembered that these gentlemen, together with the other members of the Reform Committee who have been allowed entire liberty on bail, are accused of treason, and their treatment has certainly been not less favourable than would be accorded to persons under a similar charge in any other civilized State. The preliminary examination of the prisoners will be resumed on the 11th inst. It is understood that delay was due to a combination of reasons. In answer to the first Question, I do not know the terms of the deposit. I am informed that the law on the subject of habeas corpus is contained in "Justinian's Digest Book 43"—[laughter]—titles 29 and 30, and I may point out that as these gentlemen are defended by some of the ablest lawyers in South Africa it is certain that any privileges which the local law gives to them will be invoked in their behalf. As to the third paragraph of the hon. Member's Question, I have to say the witness was committed to gaol for 12 hours for refusing to answer questions, but on appeal was immediately released, The name of the gentleman, was Schumader, from which I infer that he was of German extraction.

I beg-to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will use his influence with the Government to secure that persons cast into prison for treason or treason felony in Ireland will get similar treatment to that which he has described. ["Hear, hear!"]

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, if he can explain how the interim Report of the Royal Commission came to be printed in the newspapers several days before it was circulated to Members of this honourable House?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the fact that the interim Report of the Majority of the Royal Commission on Agriculture has been communicated in advance to the Press before the Blue-book containing this Report with separate Reports of other Members of the Commission was circulated; and whether he will take steps to prevent such occurrences as to Royal Commissions in the future?

said: I am aware that the contents of the Reports appeared in the newspapers before the Blue-book was actually circulated to Members of this House. I am making inquiries, but have not succeeded as yet in obtaining any information as to how this happened.

Will the right hon. gentleman inquire why it was that the Report of the Majority was published first in the newspapers?

That, Sir, I think is the particular inquiry I am to make. I sent on the Report presented to me, and am entirely at a loss to know how it happened.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Lance Corporal Patrick M'Elhone, 2,289, 1st Class Army Reserve, Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers, who served nearly seven years of his time in India, and received a certificate of exemplary character and second class educational qualification, has been refused a second recommendation by his superior officer to the postal authorities; can he state the grounds for this refusal; and, will he inquire into the facts, with a view to the enforcement of Rule 3, Queen's Regulation, in Gale and Poldeu's "Guide to Civil Service Employ?"

Further inquiry will be made in this case; but, it seems that the man was refused a second recommendation because he had thrown up, without satisfactory reason, similar employment previously obtained for him.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he is aware that the United States Government make it obligatory on shipping companies to fill in a form stating specifically the number of emigrants they bring to that country; and, whether he will call for a report on the practical working of this system, with a view, if found satisfactory, to the adoption of a similar system in this country, so that trustworthy data for determining the annual amount of emigration from the British Isles may be secured?

I do not quite understand how the hon. Member considers that trustworthy data for determining the actual amount of emigration from the British Isles would be secured by making it obligatory on shipping companies to fill in a form stating specifically the number of immigrants to the British Isles. Trustworthy Returns on emigration from the United Kingdom to places out of Europe are now obtained, and there is no occasion for a Report on the system adopted in the United States for obtaining Returns of immigrants.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, when he hopes to be in a position to make a statement with respect to the reorganisation of the Emigrants' Information Office?

The matter is under consideration, but I am unable at present to make any public statement.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware of the circumstances attending the dismissal of Mr. Andrew D. Murray, of Her Majesty's Customs, who, after 15 years' service in several public departments, was dismissed without pension or other reward; and, will he consider this man's case with a view to his reinstatement in his office, under the Treasury Minute of 27th August 1889?

The Secretary to the Treasury asks me to say that he has really nothing to add to his reply to a similar question put by the hon. and gallant Member for East Cork on the 30th August last. There is no intention to re-employ Mr. Murray.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will instruct the Government of India to order a public inquiry into all the circumstances relating to the suicide of the Maharaja and of the Maharani of Patna?

The unfortunate circumstance referred to is one of which I possess no further details than are supplied by the Press, and the answer given in the Viceroy's Council on the 6th of February. Mr. Woodburn then replied that the Government of the Central Provinces had instituted full inquiries, the result of which was to show that the Maharaja shot his wife and himself, being undoubtedly insane at the time. The Government of India did not think any further inquiry necessary, and I have no reason to differ from that view.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that the Maharaja, before shooting his wife and committing suicide, wrote stating that he was driven to this course in consequence of the persecution of the Foreign Office?

No, Sir; the immediate cause of the suicide was insanity.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether the rooms in the Houses of Parliament, occupied by the late Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod are now vacant, or are occupied by his successor; and, if the latter, whether that is intended to be a permanent arrangement?

The rooms occupied by the late Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod have been appropriated to the Clerk of the Parliaments under an arrangement made after an Inquiry by a Lords Committee in 1889. By this arrangement, the salary of the Clerk of the Parliaments will in future be reduced by £500 per annum, and also his special house allowance of £500 a-year will cease, in consideration of his occupying an official residence. The new Black Rod will not have an official residence properly so called, but it is proposed to allot certain office-rooms for his use in another part of the building.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will explain the circumstances under which the South Staffordshire Regiment attacked and killed 100 Moplahs near Madras; and whether there was any resistance offered by the Moplahs?

I have learned by telegram from the Government of Madras that a collision has taken place between the troops and a body of Moplah fanatics, who had committed five murders, and had then taken possession of a Hindu Temple at Manjeri. In the fighting which ensued, 88 of the latter were killed and five wounded, but the Government when they telegraphed were not aware of the immediate cause of the outbreak, nor do they mention the circumstances under which the conflict took place. Further information is expected shortly, and when I receive it I shall be ready to communicate it to the House.

asked how many of the British troops were killed or wounded in the affray?

The telegram does not state.

I bog to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, (1) if it is true that there has been a breakdown of negotiations on the Niger delimitation question, that an English Commissioner has been withdrawn; and, (2) whether serious objections have been offered to drawing a hard-and-fast line on the Niger as the frontier beyond which the negotiations should not extend?

There has been no breakdown of the Niger negotiations, nor has a British Commissioner been withdrawn. Sir A. Hemming, who is about to proceed to his post as Governor of British Guiana, has been replaced by Colonel Everett. I do not quite understand the second paragraph of the hon. Member's question, but Her Majesty's Government are not aware of any such objections having been raised.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not a fact that the French Press of late has been directing attention to this matter; also I would ask him whether the line is to be to the west of the Niger, or will a hard-and-fast line be drawn on the river itself?

I have to say in reply to the first part of the hon. Member's Question, that I have not been studying the French Press; and, as regards the second part, it would obviously be undesirable for me to express any opinion while the negotiations are proceeding.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if his attention has been called to the deficient hospital accommodation at Haulbowline, Cork Harbour; and, whether more modern sanitary appliances will be supplied, or what steps will be taken to remedy the present condition of affairs?

In reply to the hon. Member, I beg to say that no complaints have been made as to the accommodation of the Royal Naval Hospital at Haul-bowline being insufficient. At the present time there are 51 patients in the hospital, which has accommodation for 10 officers and 115 men; and as this number is much greater than usual, additional sick-berth staff have been drafted from Plymouth Hospital to supplement the nursing. No complaints as to the sanitary appliances have been received, and the last report was to the effect that the hospital throughout was clean and well cared for.

Is the hon. Member aware that the hospital has recently been, occupied by a number of men from the Flying Squadron; and also that this place was originally built for a store, and is therefore obviously unfit for hospital purposes?

I am aware that several patients from the Flying Squadron have been accommodated in the hospital, which accounts for the large number of patients at Haulbowline.

I shall raise this point on the Estimates.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether the Indian Government is aware that the Cantonment of Mhow, with a population of 32,000, has been only using 12 acres of land for the manure yard or pit for the burying of the night soil and refuse since the first establishment of the station, without any seasonal cultivation of crops; how long this state of matters is to be allowed to be continued; what was the amount at the credit of the Cantonment Fund of Mhow at the date of the last return in his possession; how the funds are invested; and, whether the Indian Government will take steps for having such balances or part thereof applied to the improvement of the sanitary condition of the bazaars in the Cantonment.

I have no official information of the circumstances detailed by the hon. Member as to the Cantonment of Mhow, but I will call the attention of the Government of India to the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, if it is true that the Civil Service Commissioners have failed to supply suitable clerks to fill the existing vacancies in the Statistical Office, Customs, thereby compelling the principal of that office to advertise in the London daily papers for clerks to fill the vacant posts; and, if so, whether he can state the reason of the failure of the Civil Service Commissioners to obtain suitable candidates for these appointments?

The Civil Service Commissioners would have no difficulty in providing for the existing vacancies by examination in the ordinary way, but the manner in which Statistical Abstractors in the Customs Department should be recruited in future is now under consideration. Pending a settlement of the question, the Board of Customs were authorised to obtain from outside such temporary clerical assistance as they might require.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will investigate into the truth or otherwise of the disproportionately largo number of those temporary men who have got through without examination, and the statement that they are relatives of officials in the office?

I will report on the subject to my hon. Friend.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the attention of the Admiralty has been called to the case of Charles Bryant, who was injured while at work on H. M. S. Monarch; whether he was injured through the negligence of men in Government employ; whether the Admiralty are aware that He desires to bring an action at Law against those who caused his injury; and whether he has been hindered from doing so by the refusal of the names of those legally responsible?

The case referred to has been before the Admiralty in 1894 and 1895. The Papers connected with it only came before me this morning, and, before giving a final answer to the noble Lord, I desire to have an opportunity of considering all the circumstances.

I bag to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state what progress, if any, has been made with the railways to be constructed by the Highland Railway Company under the Highland Railway (New Lines) Act, 1890; and whether, if the railways are not completed, the penalty of £50 per day has been enforced, in accordance with Section 10 of the Act; and if not, why not?

I understand from the Company that of the five railways authorised by the Act of 1890, line No. 1 has been constructed to Fortrose; lines Nos. 3 and 4 have been completed; line No. 5 (a short extension) has not been made, neither has line No. 2, but the Company have a Bill in Parliament to revise their powers as to this latter railway. The penalty clauses are inserted primarily for the protection of landowners and other persons whose property has been interfered with; prosecutions are not otherwise instituted.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether he can inform the House of the number and size of the Russian men-of-war now in Chinese and Japanese waters?

The Russian fleet at present stationed in the North Pacific consists of one second-class battleship of 8,400 tons, two armoured cruisers of 6,000 and 7,700 tons respectively, one protected cruiser of 5,000 tons, two gunvessels of about 1,500 tons each, four sloops of an average of 1,200 tons each, and four smaller vessels.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in the tenders for Curragh contract of meat supply, the tendered price for native live stock was less than that tendered for the supply of foreign dead meat?

In November last, a tender was accepted for the supply to Curragh Camp, until the end of May next, of live cattle and sheep; but their place of origin was not specified. No offer for foreign dead meat only was received.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any of of the pork supplied to the Navy is foreign; and, if so, how much of the contract is apportioned to foreigners; and, whether any serious difference in price existed?

A portion of the salt pork supplied to the Navy is Danish. In contracts recently concluded, orders for 275,000 lbs. to the value of £5,852 were placed with Danish firms, while orders for 1,075,000 lbs to the value of £25,447 were entrusted to Irish curers. As the prices quoted for Danish pork were lower than for Irish, the above distribution involves an additional cost to the Navy of about £2,150. I may add that in 1893, when the lowest tenders were accepted, 489,000 lbs. were ordered from Denmark and 409,500 from Ireland, and that in 1894 the orders were distributed in the proportion of two-thirds to Ireland one-third to Denmark, at an additional cost of about £360.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, whether he is aware that forms of the tenders were lately changed for the meat supply to the troops in Dublin; whether the relative prices of home and foreign meat warranted any alteration; whether the military authorities and the soldiers preferred native meat; whether the existing contract permits 60 per cent. of the total supply to be frozen meat; whether all the mutton at present supplied is frozen; and, whether any preference is given to imported foreign meat?

The forms of tender were changed to meet the alteration in the system of supply caused by the substitution, as explained on the 28th March 1895, of contracts for dead meat for meat killed in military abattoirs. The change was made for military reasons; but its financial results appear to be satisfactory. Comparison cannot be made between the prices of home and foreign meat, as the contract is for a mixed supply. The General Officer Commanding in Dublin has reported that the meat at present supplied is satisfactory in quality. The limit of the supply of frozen mutton and refrigerated beef together is 60 per cent. of the total weekly issue; but during August and September refrigerated beef is not issued at all. In any week the frozen mutton must not exceed one-seventh part of the whole meat issue. Mutton is only issued once a week; and at present the whole supply of mutton at Dublin is frozen. Sixteen per cent, of the beef supplied at Dublin is refrigerated. The whole question, however, of the supply of meat to the troops in Ireland is under consideration.

I wish to ask the hon. Gentleman was there any complaint from the Commander-in-Chief or from the troops as to the native supply before the change was made?

I am not aware that any complaint was made before the change; but since then the Commander-in-Chief has expressed approval of the meat supplied.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the language used by the Chairman at Penge Police Court, who, regarding a woman who was charged with being disorderly, stated that there ought to be some way of getting rid of people of this class permanently; that he did not know whether the means employed in the case of certain noble creatures—the lethal chamber—would be suitable; and subsequently imposed a fine of 10s. and costs, or 14 days; and, whether he will inquire into the case, and prevent the use of such language in future decisions?

I have inquired into this case, and find that the woman had already been convicted 14 or 15 times of similar offences. The Chairman of the Bench informs me that the circumstances of the case were distressing, and that, though it is true he referred to the lethal chamber and expressed a wish that some less terrible, but equally suitable, mode of dealing with incorrigible cases of depravity could be suggested, no one who heard the remark could question that it was made as a result of earnest feeling for the unhappy woman who was before him. However much I may regret them, I have no power to prevent observations of this kind.

Will the right hon. gentleman take such measures in consultation with the Lord Chancellor as will prevent magistrates from using such language towards prisoners?

I have no power to prevent observations of the kind.

Am I to understand that the right hon. Gentleman approves of the observation1? [Cries of "Order."]

I have already stated that I regret the remarks exceedingly.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is able to give any information as to the number, if any, of British subjects killed or injured in the recent dynamite explosion at Johannesburg; and if he could, as far as possible, ascertain the names, and cause them to be published?

I have already telegraphed for information on this subject, but have not yet received that reply. When I do so I will publish it in the Press. I may add that I doubt whether British subjects of European descent were killed.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, whether his attention has been called to the case of Mr. Worthington, a retired school teacher, who is receiving a pension of £25 a year after 40 years' service; and whether the Education Department will consider his claims to, an increase in his pension?

This teacher's pension was awarded in 1890, after a full consideration of his claims. The Committee of Council see no reason for increasing it.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether a large number of postmen in London have not yet been provided with their winter clothes; and, if so, what is the cause of the delay?

All the London postmen have now received their winter uniform, though there are still 196 misfitting garments which have not yet been returned from the contractors after alteration. It is, however, the fact that these uniforms wore not supplied so early as they should have been, and the causes of this delay are now under investigation.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether it is the intention of the Government to issue summer clothing to postmen this year?

Yes, Sir. It is the intention of the Government to issue summer clothing to postmen as usual; and the Postmaster General is endeavouring to insure that the issue shall take place with as little delay as is possible in the circumstances.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, whether he is aware that, in certain cases, a Poor Houses Combination Committee, having lunatic wards duly certified, and periodically inspected by the Board of Lunacy, has been refused permission to take in pauper lunatics from other counties, even where there is more accommodation in such Poor House than is necessary to supply the wants of the Combination?

I am informed by the General Lunacy Board that it has only been in exceptional cases, as where there is a difficulty in finding accommodation elsewhere, or where the lunatic wards afford unusually good accommodation and treatment to their inmates that the Board have sanctioned the arrangement contemplated in the hon. Member's Question. Neither of these exceptional features is found in the case referred to, and the Board are of opinion that the pauper lunatics of Kirkcudbrightshire can be most satisfactorily provided for in the Crichton Royal Institution at Dumfries.

Does the answer apply to Wigtonshire as well?

I will inquire as to that and communicate with the hon. Baronet.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, if his attention has been called to a circular, dated 4th February 1896, issued by the London and India Docks Joint Committee to shipowners, by which they seek to evade the terms and obligations of their Act of Parliament, and of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th sections of Clause 493 of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894, and by such means to tax all goods delivered on over-side entries in this port; and, what action he is prepared to take, making the evasion of the said Acts impossible; and if the right hon. Gentleman has seen a letter in the St. James' Gazette to-day from the editor of the Produce World, in which he states that he had sent the President of the Board of Trade a copy of his journal of the 21st February, in which the circular referred there is dealt with, and on the 27th received an acknowledgment that it had been received?