I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that many European States do by law limit the responsibility of vessels under their flags, against which damages resulting from loss or accident are claimed, to the value of such vessels; and, whether, in such instances, all rights to recover such damages when ascertained are against the vessels only?

I am aware that in many European States there is a law of the nature referred to by my hon. Friend, but the, exact effect of the provisions of the several Statutes is a question of difficult legal construction as to which I am not prepared to express an authoritative opinion.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, as the distance intervening between the present terminus of the Indian railway system in the south of Afghanistan and that of the Russian railway system on the north is only about 700 miles, and Russia is now making a further extension of the Transcaspian line in the direction of Herat, Her Majesty's Government will consider the expediency of opening-negotiations with the Afghan and the Russian Governments for the construction of a line through Candahar and Herat connecting the two systems, with a view to the completion of an overland railway to Calcutta?

It would be quite premature at this moment to consider the expediency of entering into negotiations for the construction of a line of railway beyond the frontiers of India to join a line that is either not yet commenced or only in the earliest stages of progress.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the Post Office authorities will extend telegraphic communication from Recess, Connemara, to Carna, Connemara, in view of the fact that a steamer calls there once a week from Galway, and that serious inconvenience frequently arises when through any cause the steamer fails to come on the appointed day; and also, in view of the fact that telegraphic communication to that district is most important and essential for the proper development of its fishing industry?

The Postmaster General will be happy to make further inquiry on the subject of the extension of the telegraph system to Carna, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the Post Office authorities will re-consider the question of establishing a delivery of letters to Carna, Connemara, county Galway, on Sundays?

As was explained to the hon. Member a few months ago, the post to Carna on week days involves an expenditure in excess of the revenue available, and further expenditure for a Sunday service would not therefore be warranted. The circumstances being unaltered, the Postmaster General regrets that he is unable to meet the wishes of the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, will he explain why parcels sent by post from Ireland, and arriving by the mail train due at Euston at 6.15 a.m., are not delivered in the northwestern postal district of London before 5 p.m.; and if he will take steps to expedite their delivery?

To avoid delay to the letter mails, parcels from Ireland are not (except on Sunday nights) sent by the night mail viâ Kingstown due at Euston at 6.15 a.m., as the hon. Member appears to assume. The route for parcels is viâ, North Wall, and the train from Holyhead which brings the parcels from the North Wall boat is due at Euston at 6.50 a.m. The delivery of Irish parcels by this mail commences in the northwestern town district about 11 a.m., and is completed about mid-day. Even in the remotest parts of the north-western district, such as Hendon and Mill Hill, the delivery should take place before 3 p.m.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that grave public inconvenience has been caused by the action of the postal authorities in discontinuing the night mail from Dromod to Mohill, and thus delaying letters for days from residents in Sligo and Roscommon to residents in South Leitrim; and, whether he will recommend that the night mail he resumed in the same way as existed for the last 20 years?

The night mail from Dromod to Mohill has not been discontinued, but under a recent alteration it appears that letters from several neighbouring places which formerly fell into the morning delivery at Mohill are not now delivered until mid-day. Directions have been given which will have the effect of restoring the communication which has been temporarily disturbed.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that night mails between Dublin and Wexford are carried by an ordinary goods train which leaves Dublin at 8 o'clock in the evening, and very frequently does not arrive in Wexford until 7 or 8 o'clock next morning, delaying the rural postmen from an hour to two hours; and, whether the Dublin, Wicklow, and Wexford Railway Company are receiving any subsidy for carrying the night mails beyond the ordinary fare for parcels; and, if not, whether he will reconsider the desirability of making arrangements with the Railway Company for carrying the night mails, and provide a regular mail service in future?

The night mail from Dublin to Wexford is carried by a goods train which leaves Dublin at 8 p.m., and is due at Wexford at 5 a.m. On one occasion only since the 1st June has the arrival at Wexford been so late as 7 a.m., but there has been much irregularity in the working of the train and the rural postmen have consequently been late in starting upon their rounds. The Dublin, Wicklow, and Wexford Railway Company receive under their contract with the post office an annual payment of substantial amount which covers all the services they perform. No particular portion of this payment is earmarked to the night mail, but there is no reason for considering the company to be insufficiently remunerated. The Department is in correspondence with the company with a view to insuring a more punctual observance of the contract obligations.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the officials of the Board of Trade report to him all cases of Foreign vessels arriving at British ports which they consider overladen or not laden in accordance with the regulations applied to British vessels; if he can state how many Foreign ships have been thus reported, and whether he will grant a return giving the particulars of each case for the last three years; and whether, if these returns have not been reported by the officials of the Board of Trade in the past, he will give instructions to have them reported for the future?

Neither the Board of Trade nor its officers have any authority to interefere with foreign vessels arriving overladen at ports in the United Kingdom, except in the case of deck loads of timber in winter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the resolution recently passed by the Scariff Board of Guardians, in which they expressed their satisfaction that the Irish Light Railways Bill is before Parliament, but urged that the restriction of free grants for the whole cost of construction to congested districts would work unjustly, as it would exclude districts which, though not classed among the congested districts, are equally unable to assist themselves, and suggested that full discretion should be left to the Lord Lieutenant and the Board of Works as to the several areas and the extent of aid to be given in every case considered worthy of financial assistance; and, whether the Government can act in accordance with the recommendations of this resolution?

I have received a copy of the resolution in question. The provision was inserted in the Bill after full consideration, and I cannot at present see my way to alter it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether he will grant a public Inquiry into the case of the Maharaja of Jhallawar, in such a form that the Maharaja may have a full opportunity of making his defence; and, whether this Inquiry will include an examination of the charges made by him against the Political Resident?

The decision of the Indian Government, which I confirmed in a Dispatch of the 1st of May, is final, and I have no intention of re-opening this case.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, will he explain why it is that a pattern or sample sent from one point to another within the United Kingdom is required to have the name, trade, and address of the sender printed or conspicuously stamped (not written) on the outside of the wrapper or label, on pain of a fine twice the deficient postage at the letter rate, whereas in the case of a pattern or sample sent to, or received from, a foreign country in the Postal Union it is not demanded or necessary that the trade of the sender should be printed, stamped, or written upon the wrapper or label, and the address and other particulars allowed may be in writing; and, whether he will modify in these respects the inland pattern post regulations, so as to place British traders on the same footing as their foreign competitors?

The object of the inland regulation to which the him. Member refers, is to insure the sample post being used only by persons engaged in trade. In the case of foreign sample packets, it could not be adopted without the concurrence of the other countries belonging to the Postal Union. The British trader is really not hampered by this difference of practice, as all he has to do is to buy an indiarubber stamp to use, which probably gives him much less trouble than writing his name and other particulars on every parcel.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if his attention has been called to what occurred at the last Vestry Election of the St. Peter's Ward of the parish of St. Mary, Newington, when the Returning Officer permitted some of the candidates and their polling agents to act as counting clerks in taking the poll; whether he will ascertain the legal effect of these proceedings; and, supposing that such persons failed to make the declaration of secrecy required by the Ballot Act, if the whole election has been thereby rendered void; and whether, in any case, the employment of a candidate or his polling agent in counting the votes at the poll for his own election is such an infringement of the provisions of the the Local Government Act, 1894, as to invalidate the election?

I have made inquiry of the Returning Officer, and I gather from his communication that two of the candidates at the election in question, and another person, all of whom had been appointed as counting agents, did take part in the counting of the votes. I am informed that these three persons took the declaration of secrecy required by the Ballot Act, and that the two who were candidates were not successful in their candidature. The Local Government Board have no authority whatever to determine a question as to the legality of the election of a vestry-man. When it is desired to obtain a decision with regard to the validity of an election, an Election Petition should be presented, within the Described time, in order that the question may he determined by the Election Court. It is not a matter in which the Board can in any way intervene or express an opinion.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) why the sale to the tenants of the Aremberg Chute Estate, Castleisland, Kerry, was not carried out when their offer of £7,502, including tithe and head rent, was accepted by the Land Commission, and the tenants had for some time paid the statutory rate of interest, and consequently regarded themselves as the purchasers; (2) whether he is aware that a sale for a sum of £6,083 for the same property has lately been made to another party, whilst all the tenants are still desirous to complete their contract of purchase; and (3) whether, pending the completion of this last sale, he will cause inquiry to be made into the matter with a view to having the former sale carried out?

It is not correct to say that the offer of the tenants on this property, to which reference is made, was accepted by the Land Commission. It is the fact, however, that negotiations with a view to purchase were commenced in 1892, but subsequently fell through in consequence of the failure of the parties to comply with certain requisitions issued by the Commission. I believe the property has since been sold to another party, as stated in the second paragraph, but I have no official information as to the amount for which it has been sold.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the failure consisted of?

I don't think I could state off-hand. If the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question, I will endeavour to answer.

Did it not consist in the fact that one of the tenants did not come in at the time the other tenants did so! Later on he did come in and did consent.

I rather think that refers to a later date.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the tenants in question made their Offers as early as November 1891: that they have been paying rent on the basis of those offers, and that the rents are being accepted? ["Hear, hear!"]

I believe, Sir, the offers were made; I am not aware of the fact as regards the payments made by the tenants since that time.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with regard to the fact that within the current year ten sergeants of constabulary from the depot, and four from counties, have been drafted for service into the Belfast force, could he state how many constables of over 15 years' service are now in the Belfast force still without promotion, and how many of these have passed their qualifying examination for promotion: and will he instruct the Inspector General to withdraw the 14 sergeants referred to, in order to make room for a similar number of constables in the Belfast force qualified for advancement?

During the current year two sergeants and one acting sergeant were drafted into Belfast, and in their places two acting sergeants were moved out of Belfast, and another sergeant will be moved soon. Further, two constables have been specially promoted and transferred from Belfast during this month, and they will not be replaced in Belfast by two sergeants or acting sergeants. There are 193 constables of over 15 years' service in Belfast without promotion. Of these, 101 have passed the qualifying examination; but only 65 of them have been recommended by their officers for advancement. The Inspector General cannot, in the interests of the service, transfer a number of sergeants or acting sergeants from Belfast without replacing them by a like number of the same rank taken from the counties to which the former are transferred; but he is quite prepared to transfer, at public expense, on their application, according as opportunity may offer, any good senior constables who are well recommended for promotion to any county in Ireland that they may select, in which they have no connections, and where they consider their chances of promotion would be better than in Belfast.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Homo Department whether he is aware that, owing to insufficient fencing, upward of 2,300 feet of the frontage of the Regent's Canal is in an entirely unprotected state; that in the first 8 months of 1895 there had been 31 cases of drowning and 43 persons rescued from drowning; and that within the last seven weeks there had been 15 similar accidents within the Bethnal Green, Shoreditch, and other eastern boundaries of the canal; and, if this be so, whether any measures will be adopted, without further delay, to sufficiently fence the canal so as to prevent the occurrence of such accidents?

The number of accidents stated in the question is, I am informed, unhappily correct. As I explained, however, on a previous occasion, the canal banks are private property, and I have no power to compel the company to take measures to prevent the occurrence of such accidents.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether he will ascertain what sum the costs came to which were allowed by the County Carlow Grand Jury in the case of the malicious burning of a cabin in the lands of Lieutenant Colonel John James Hardy Eustace; (2) whether the Grand Jury approved of the actual amount before it was included in the rates and collected from the ratepayers in the special area over which the amount was levied; and (3) if the costs were taxed or checked before being passed; and, if so, by whom?

The costs allowed in this case amounted to £1 10s. The reply to the second paragraph is in the affirmative, and to the last paragraph in the negative.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland if he will state upon what legal authority the county Carlow Grand Jury on the 13th instant passed a presentment for £12 to Mr. Charles H. Thorpe, solicitor, for preparing and registering the bonds of six barony constables appointed at the previous assizes, and pay £24 a year to that gentleman for that service; and whether the cost of preparing these bonds should be borne by the barony constables themselves; under what authority and by whose instructions Mr. Thorpe performed this work; and whether Mr. Thorpe also charges the six barony constables £1 each for these bonds, in addition to the amount paid by the Grand Jury?

I have received a telegram from the Secretary to the Grand Jury which does not contain sufficient information to enable me to answer the Question. I have called for a further report, when I have received it I shall be happy to answer the hon. Member; but I may perhaps refer him to the answers given to several questions similar to the present to the effect that the Executive is not responsible for and has no control over the Grand Jury in matters such as these, and that if any ratepayer contest the legality of a presentment, his best way is to traverse it before the Judge of Assizes and have its validity determined.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can now say if any inspectors were recently sent to inspect the ground of the proposed new rifle range at Ballykinlar, near Dundrum, county Down; whether he will also state the date of the last inspection, the nature of their Report, and what is intended to be done in the matter; and, if any inquiry has been made as to the value of the lands required and the amount to be paid the tenants, and with what result?

Inquiries on the subject referred to in the Question are at present taking place, but I am not in a position to make any definite statement as to the result.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the generous reductions in rent alleged to have been given by Ulster landlords in flax-growing districts, whether he is now in a position to say were such reductions given in respect of last year's rent upon any, and, if so, how many, of the large estates in the counties of Down and Antrim, where flax is largely grown?

The matters referred to in this Question have already been dealt with by me in answer to previous questions of the hon. Member, to the replies to which I have nothing to add. It has been the invariable custom to withhold the description of particular estates on which rent abatements have been granted or refused, and from this custom I cannot depart. I may add that I have gone personally into the matter, and am satisfied of the correctness of the previous replies to the hon. Gentleman's questions.

I did not ask for the names of particular estates. I only asked whether there were any estates.

If the hon. Gentleman will put a Question down again, I will try to answer it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the proceedings at an inquest, held in Belfast Workhouse into the death of an inmate named Eliza Jane Hanna, in which it appeared that the deceased had been a patient in Belfast Asylum; (2) will he state when and under what statute she was transferred to Belfast Workhouse; (3) whether she belonged to the Belfast Union; and, if not, under what authority did the Guardians of the Poor there admit her and keep her confined in Belfast Workhouse at the expense of the ratepayers of Belfast; (4) whether Belfast Workhouse has ever been certified by the Inspectors of Lunatics or the Board of Control as a suitable and proper place for the reception of the insane; (5) whether he is aware that the doctor of the workhouse swore at the Inquiry that the patient was transferred without any consultation between the doctors of the two institutions, and that the recreation yard at the workhouse was so small and usually so noisy that it had been described by one of the inspectors as a pandemonium; and (6), whether he will have full inquiry made into the matter?

My attention has been drawn by the Question to the proceedings at the inquest referred to in the first paragraph. The clerk of the union states that the woman was received into the workhouse in December 1893, as a presumably destitute person, in exchange for another person sent from the workhouse to the lunatic asylum. The woman did not belong to the Belfast Union. The reply to the fourth paragraph is in the negative; no such certificate is required. As to the fifth paragraph, no consultation is held regarding the condition of patients between the medical officers of the two institutions. I understand the medical officer of the workhouse stated at the inquest that he had heard that an inspector of lunatics had described the recreation yard in the manner described, but I have not ascertained from the inspector of lunatics whether he has been correctly reported.

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman, did he make any inquiry as to the correctness of the Report?

I am making that inquiry.

The right hon. Gentleman did not answer the Question under what authority the guardians admitted the woman and kept her confined in the workhouse at the expense of the ratepayers of Belfast?

I will make inquiry into the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department—(1) whether he will consider the propriety of establishing some system of regulation, and insisting on satisfactory proofs of good faith and the production of credentials, before sanctioning street collections for charitable objects in future; (2) whether the police have recently been made aware of gross abuses and frauds on the public in this connection; and, (3) whether the "move on" regulation can be applied to persons who take up fixed stations in the streets without leave or authority?

These collections are not sanctioned either by myself or by the police, and without statutory powers I cannot make regulations or insist on the production of credentials or proofs of good faith. The answer to the second paragraph is in the negative, and to the third that if obstruction is caused or the general public annoyed by these collectors they would be cautioned and, if necessary, removed. But so far I have received no complaints of obstruction.

I beg to ask the Parliamentary representative of the Charity Commissioners, whether any inquiry into the management and present position of the Covent Garden Theatre Fund, established in 1765 for the support of aged, infirm, and indigent actors and actresses and relief of their widows and children has been instituted; and, whether he can state to what extent this fund is now fulfilling the objects for which it was founded?

The Covent Garden Theatrical Fund is regulated by an Act of 16 Geo. III. c. 31, and so far as it is in the nature of a friendly or benefit society it: is exempt from the jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioners. No such inquiry as is mentioned has been made or asked for, and consequently no such statement as is now asked for can be given.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he will decline to sanction any of the several sets of bye-laws proposed to be made by the War Office in respect of artillery practice ranges from Gilkicker Fort, Spit-bank Fort, St. Helen's Fort, Horse Sand and No Man's Land Forts, No. 2 Battery Stokes Bay Lines, Park-pool Battery, Lumps Fort, the Eastney Batteries, and Fort Cumberland, until a public inquiry has been held by the Board of Trade under the provisions of the Artillery and Rifle Ranges Act, 1885, c. 36, sec. 3, sub-sec. (2); whether at such an inquiry not only the bye-laws above referred to shall be considered, but the War Office shall be requested to bring forward any bye-laws in respect of other places which they may have under consideration, and to state the extent to which such bye-laws will affect the sea areas proposed to be affected; and, whether at such an inquiry all persons who consider themselves to be affected by such bye-laws might have an opportunity of being heard?

It is intended that a local public Inquiry should be held with respect to the several sets of bye-laws proposed to be made by the War Office, in respect of artillery ranges in the neighbourhood of Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight, as soon as all the bye-laws at present proposed for ranges in that neighbourhood have been advertised. It will not be convenient to deal with bye-laws for ranges in other parts of the United Kingdom at the same Inquiry. I have no doubt that full information will be given at the Inquiry by the representatives of the War Office, as to the extent and effect of the proposed bye-laws. The Inquiry will be public, and all persons interested will be heard.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that the men working at the coal mines of Castlecomer, county Kilkenny, cannot now be employed full time on account of the accumulation of coal due to the want of railway accommodation for its removal; and, whether he will consider the desirability of having railway connection with Castlecomer established in the interests of the men employed at the collieries, and for the further development of the colliery industry there.

In reply to this Question I can only repeat the statement made by me on the 11th May, namely, that the proposal referred in the second paragraph will be considered in connection with other similar proposals.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it has been decided to demolish the Hulme Cavalry Barracks, Manchester, and Regent Road Infantry Barracks, Salford, and in sell the sites upon which these barracks stand; whether it is intended to maintain the garrison in the future at the same strength as has bean the case in the past.

No decision to sell these sites has been arrived at. The whole question of barrack accommodation and the necessary garrison for Manchester and Salford is at present under consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will endeavour to secure that the Report of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland should be distributed in time for the adjourned Debate on the Education Estimates next Friday.

The Report in question was circulated this morning.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury who were the members of the Committee on the Irish Teachers' Pension Fund, and by whom were they appointed; and, whether he will lay a copy of their Report, together with any actuarial Reports which were placed before them, upon the Table of the House, in order that hon. Members may have an opportunity of examining it before the adjourned discussion on the Irish Education Estimates is resumed?

The Committee consists of Mr. Redington (the resident Commissioner of the Education Board), Mr. Finlaison (the Actuary of the National Debt Office), and Mr. Spring Rice, of the Treasury. It was appointed by the Treasury, with the concurrence, of the Irish Government. I fear that their Report cannot in any ease be ready in time for discussion in Supply, nor can the Government pledge themselves as to its presentation before it has been received; but, as I said on the 8th of June, "as soon as the Report of the Committee has been considered by the Government a full explanation of the position of the fund will be made to Parliament."

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the proposed grant-in-aid of the Irish Teachers' Pension Fund will to any extent benefit the teachers in Irish Convent National Schools: and, if not, how is it proposed to recoup those teachers for the loss they have sustained by the now admittedly insufficient amounts granted to Ireland in respect of the school grant for the last four years?

I must ask the hon. and learned Gentleman to defer this Question till Thursday.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that the East London Water Company has cut off the supply to its customers from 9 o'clock in the evening to 6 o'clock in the morning until further notice; and, if so, considering the great inconvenience caused in East London, is he prepared to take any steps in the matter?

I am aware that the Last London Water Company have given notice that the water supply will be shut off from 9 at night until G in the morning. Immediately I received the information I requested General Scott, the water examiner of the metropolis, to inquire into the facts and to report to me the result. I much regret to state that this discontinuance of the supply at night has become necessary as a precautionary measure, in consequence of the fact that the works authorised by the Act of 1894 have not yet been fully carried out, and also because of the long-continued drought, which has been far more serious even than in the previous year. I am in communication with the East London Water Company on the subject, and I hope that the New River Company—with whom, also, I am in communication—will be able to render some assistance as regards the supply by the East London Water Company.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been directed to a Renter's telegram from Cape Town, in which it is stated that in their report of the circumstances attending the Jameson Raid the Select Committee of the Cape House of Assembly find that the Chartered Company supplied all funds with the knowledge, of the London office; and, whether, if on inquiry he ascertains that the Select Committee have thus reported, the Government will, pending the investigation into these matters at home, consider the propriety of advising the Crown, in the exercise of the prerogative, to suspend all rights and powers conferred on the Company by the Charter of 1889?

In reply to the hon. and learned Member, I have to say that, so far as I can judge, there is some error in transmission in Reuter's telegram. The portion of the message referred to in the Question is not borne out either by my own official advices, by the very full telegram of The Times, or by the Central News message. Inquiry is, I have reason to believe, being made by the Chartered Company on the subject, and the matter will be cleared up in a day or two.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether he has inquired to what extent English and Scotch insurance companies have lent money on the security of Irish landed estates; and, (2) whether he is in a position to affirm or deny that English and Scotch insurance companies are in the aggregate thus involved in Irish landed estates to the extent of over seven millions sterling?

No such inquiry as suggested has been attempted. The Government has not power, nor would it be possible or desirable, to investigate the mortgage or other indebtedness of the owners of estates in Ireland, and no apparent advantage would result in attempting to distinguish between those incumbrance vested in English or Scotch insurances companies, and those vested in other public bodies, or in private persons. I am not in a position either to affirm or deny the statement made in the second paragraph.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, before the Committee Stage on Clause 34 of the Land Law (Ireland) Bill, which provides for the forced sale of Irish estates to the tenants at any price fixed by the Land Commission, he will present a Return showing the aggregate amount of capital invested by English and Scotch insurance companies in those Irish estates which are now in the Incumbered Estates Court, and to which the provisions of Clause 34 would apply?

The Question does not correctly represent the terms of Clause 34, the price and the conditions at which the holdings are to be offered are to be determined by the Land Judge, having regard to what he may consider reasonable and just, taking into account "the interests of all persons interested in the estate." It would not be possible to obtain even an approximately accurate Return, such as that suggested in the Question, and even if such a Return could be obtained not just reason appears to exist for attempting to distinguish between debts due to English and Scotch insurance companies and those vested in either public bodies or in private persons.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if be would endeavour to pass into law, this Session, the Fisheries Acts Amendment Bill, which is to prevent the sale of immature fish, and is pressed on the Government by the deep sea fishing interests of the East Coast, and as affecting the supply of fish to the people.

asked at the same time whether the Government would be prepared to receive a deputation on the subject.

did not think it necessary that a deputation should wait upon him to inform him as the various phases of this important question. A deputation had already been received at the Board of Trade with reference to it, and he himself had had the advantage of hearing a long discussion on the subject in London by representatives of the fishing committees throughout the country, and he found that there was quite a unanimous opinion on their part that legislation in the direction of the Bill already introduced by the Government was urgently required. Having regard, however, to the statement made by the Leader of the House yesterday, he did not imagine there was much chance of the Bill being dealt with in this House this Session, unless, of course, he could receive some assurance that the Measure would be practically an uncontested one.

could at once give the right hon. Gentleman the assurance that the Kill would be highly contentious.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention had been called to the fact that there was very strong opposition to this Bill in the most important fishing centres.

I know there is opposition, but my opinion is that it is not a strong one.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that unanimous representations against, the Bill have been received from Ramsgate and Lowestoft?

I am also aware that at the meeting, where all the fishing committees throughout the kingdom were represented, my right hon. Friend took up an attitude of opposition to the report and found himself in a minority of one. [Laughter].

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the fishermen were represented at all at this meeting?

I cannot say whether any particular class was represented, but I know it was attended by representative men from all the fishing committees throughout the kingdom.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Bill deals with a highly contentious question as between the steam trawlers and the line fishermen?

I am quite satisfied that the Bill is of such a contentious nature that it is impossible to contemplate passing it this Session.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether his attention has been drawn to the Press Association special telegram of Friday last from Buluwayo, stating that Native Commissioner Thomas had been on a grain-collecting expedition and had, besides killing 30 natives, collected 1,300 bags of grain; that 1,020 of these bags of grain, valued at £12,500, had been destroyed in obedience to orders; that owing to the destruction of the grain famine is imminent; and that if the natives act in accordance with the amnesty and come in it will be utterly impossible to feed them for one day; and whether, if this be the case, he will take steps to prevent such waste of food and to insure a supply of food sufficient to fulfil the terms of the amnesty?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to a statement contained in a Reuter's telegram dated Buluwayo, 17th July, to the effect that Native Commissioner Thomas had destroyed about 1,000 bags of grain which he had captured from the natives, that famine was imminent, many of the native kraals being entirely without food, and that if the starving people should surrender and come in to Buluwayo there was not food enough in the place to feed them for a single day; whether this has been done with his authority, and, whether he will take steps to prevent the repetition of such proceedings?

In answering this Question I may be allowed to take the opportunity of also answering the similar Question by the hon. Member for the Leigh Division of Lancashire. I have no official confirmation of the statement referred to. I do not propose to interfere with the discretion of Sir F. Carrington in the measures he may take for the suppression of the rebellion, but it does not appear to be true that the rebels are required to come to Buluwayo. If they submit, I do not doubt that every possible effort will be made to save them from starvation.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will take into consideration the desire for an amelioration of the pensions of the prison officers, and if necessary, make recommendations to the Treasury?

I have already given the fullest consideration to the petitions which have been submitted to me by prison officers for an improvement in the terms of their superannuation, and regret that I do not see my way to propose, or to recommend the Treasury to propose, the alteration in the law which would be necessary to place prison officers on a better footing than other civil servants in this matter. As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the conditions of service of prison officers were fully inquired into by a Departmental Committee in 1891; this Committee, while recommending improvements in those conditions in other respects, some of which have been effected, reported against any alteration in the pension scale, and the considerations which led them to that decision remain unaltered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether he is aware that Orange flags were displayed from all the windows of the Newbliss courthouse on Monday the 13th July; that the courthouse was occupied during a portion of that day by a numerous body of Orangemen, including a band which crowded the magisterial bench, and played "Kick the Pope," "Boyne Water," and other party tunes; and that two justices of the peace, adorned with Orange sashes, took part in this demonstration; (2) is he also aware that there was suspended across the principal street of the town an Orange arch, under which the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the place, in proceeding about their ordinary business, were obliged to pass, amidst the gibes of persons assembled there; (3) will he take notice of the conduct of the magistrates who gave encouragement to these proceedings; and (1) will he advise that some other building than the present be obtained for judicial purposes in Newbliss?

On the 2nd and 9th instant I stated, in answer to Questions put to me, that the room in which Petty Sessions are held at New-bliss had never been used for party purposes, nor had flags or emblems ever been displayed from this room. That statement was, I believe, correct; but I am informed that on the 13th instant Orange flags were displayed from the windows of this room, that the room was occupied by Orangemen, including a band which played several tunes, the names of which I have not been able to ascertain. Regarding the second paragraph, the police inform me that so far as they can ascertain there is no foundation for the statement that insult was offered to Roman Catholics who passed under the floral arch. As to the use of the Petty Sessions room in the manner described on the 13th instant, I have referred the matter to the Lord Chancellor.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether an application has reached the Treasury from the Education Department for £3 3s. per week for a temporary typewriting clerk; whether he is aware that this clerk has passed no examination and has less than four years' service, whereas Second Division clerks must pass a severe competitive examination and serve 14 years before reaching a salary equal to that proposed, which is moreover unattainable by assistant clerks in the same Department, some of whom have over 20 years' service; whether the salary of the officer superintending the typewriters at the Local Government Board, whose duties include translations, shorthand, typewriting, and attendance at interviews, is only 30s. per week: and, whether there are several of the permanent staff' competent to perform the duties required from the clerk for whom the application above referred to is made?

I am not prepared to communicate to the hon. Member what, if any, proposals affecting the establishment of other Departments are before the Treasury. Any proposal submitted by the Education Office will receive full consideration.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will urge upon the railway companies the desirability of making such alterations in the structure of carriage compartments as will prevent the perpetration of outrages similar to that which has recently been committed on the Brighton line?

I propose to place myself in communication with the Railway Association on the subject referred to.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the boy messengers employed in the Statistical Office, Customs, London, receive an annual increment of pay 56 per cent. greater than that received by the majority of established men clerks engaged in that office; and, if so, whether he can see his way to remedy this inequality?

The majority of men employed in the Statistical Office of the Custom House. London, are of a grade lower than that of clerk, entitled "statistical abstractor." They are paid on a scale of annual salary common to abstractors throughout the service—namely, a scale rising from a minimum of £80 to a maximum of £150 by annual increments of £2 10s. The office of boy messenger in the Customs Department is a temporary appointment: the boys employed, whose services are discontinued when they attain the age of 20, are paid weekly wages a, the rate, of 6s. 6d., rising by 1s. 6d. a week per annum to a maximum of 14s. a week. The annual increase in the weekly wages of boy messengers is 56 per cent. greater than the annual rate of increment of the grade of abstractors, but the two situations are obviously of such totally different characters that a comparison of this kind, relating to a single incident of their respective emoluments, is valueless.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what is the reason of the delay in appointing the new grade of assistants of Customs; and, whether he would take early steps to appoint those men who have been declared qualified for the position, and remove the dissatisfaction which at present prevails?

There is no undue delay in appointing the new grade of assistants of Customs, a considerable amount of detail, with a consideration of the circumstances of each port, being involved. The work of assigning numbers to the respective ports is in a forward state, and, when this work is completed, successful candidates will, within the limits of the aggregate number sanctioned by the Treasury, be forthwith appointed. Meanwhile, the Treasury have allowed the Board to make these appointments retrospective to the 1st January last, so that no pecuniary loss will ensue to to the officers appointed. No expression of dissatisfaction on the subject has reached the Board of Customs.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether, in addition to the correspondence mentioned in the Report of the Board of National Education for Ireland, between that body and the Treasury, on the subject of the Irish School Grant, there are any other letters or documents relating to that matter which have passed between the Board and the Treasury: and whether he would have any objection to lay upon the Table a complete copy of the correspondence?

I have already stated that the correspondence on this subject is of a Departmental and Confidential character, and that I cannot consent, to lay it on the Table of the House.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the amount of the law costs incurred by the Commissioners of Irish Lights in defence of the action brought against them by Principal Keeper John George Harrison for wrongful dismissal and libel, and what Department sanctioned the payment of the costs in this action, and from what fund was the payment made; and can he state by what Department the payment by the Commissioners of Irish Lights of a sum of money as compensation to John Francis Harris, assistant keeper, for wrongful dismissal and libel, was sanctioned, and from what fund was it paid?

The Commissioners of Irish Lights, by the advice of the Law Officers of the Crown, paid Mr. Harrison in full discharge of all claims and £80 for costs. The Commissioners had also to pay their own costs and fees of the Jury. The Board of Trade sanctioned the payment of the costs in this action as expenses incurred by the General Lighthouse Authority. In the case of Mr. Harris, payment of £40 compensation and £5 5s, costs was also sanctioned by the Board of Trade.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the case of an ex-convict who, at Lowestoft on Monday last, was sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment with hard labour for failing to report himself to the, police; whether he will state who authorised the prosecution; and whether it was true that the man had obtained employment at sea for four months, that he had reported himself the day before going away at Hull and again on his return at Grimsby; and, if so, will he advise the remission of the remainder of the sentence?

I have received a report of the reconviction of the man referred to. On his release in December last he took up his residence at Lowestoft, and last reported himself to the Lowestoft police on the 1st January. During that month a summons was taken out against him for assault, but he disappeared, and though special attention was called in the Police Gazette to the fact that he might be found at Hull or Grimsby, the places where the prisoner alleges he reported himself, nothing more was heard of him until the present month. On his own statement even, which was entirely unsupported, he had committed an offence by leaving Lowestoft without reporting his intention of doing so to the police. The Hull police, moreover, deny that he has reported himself to them during the present year. The prosecution was undertaken, in the usual manner, by the county of Suffolk police, and I see no reason for interference. The man's previous record is a very bad one.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether an Order in Council is under the immediate consideration of the Lord Chancellor giving effect to a Resolution of the Judges, whereby the town of Leicester and the county of Leicestershire are to be deprived of a civil assize and sent either to Derby or Nottingham; and, if so, by what right this is to be done without consulting the town or county in any way?

I beg to ask the Attorney General if the Lord Chancellor contemplates issuing an Order in Council for the abolition of civil business at all future assizes in the county of Wilts and other counties; and if he can state what are the exact terms of such proposed Order; and to request that such Order may not be promulgated until the local authorities and the County Councils have had an opportunity of expressing their protests against this attempt to deprive them of their historic rights?

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether it has been decided that in future civil assizes will be hold only once a year at Worcester; and, if so, why this course has been proposed, thus depriving that county and city of their ancient privileges without any consultation with the local authorities?

I beg to ask the Attorney General if it is proposed that in future the Cornish assizes, or some of them, shall be held at Exeter, instead of Bodmin as heretofore; and if he will take immediate steps to prevent that proposal from being carried out, as the great distance from many parts of Cornwall to Exeter would entail great inconvenience to litigants and witnesses?

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether the Lord Chancellor purposes, by an Order in Council, to deprive Buckinghamshire of a civil assize; and, if so, on what grounds such a proposal is made, and whether the interests of the county have been consulted?

I beg to ask the Attorney General if the Lord Chancellor contemplates issuing an Order in Council for the abolition of civil business at future assizes in the county of Bedford, and whether the promulgation of such Order could be post-posed until the county and borough of Bedford have had an opportunity of expressing their views on this proposal to deprive them of their ancient rights?

asked whether a similar resolution was in contemplation for the city of Hereford, and whether the inhabitants would not he consulted before the change was made?

In reply to these questions, I am directed by the Lord Chancellor to say that, so far as he is concerned, no alteration in the assize arrangements will be made without opportunity being given to those who are interested in the matter being heard; but it is not desirable at the present stage to enter upon a discussion of matters which are the subject of communications between the Lord Chancellor and Her Majesty's Judges.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury on what days he proposes to ask the House to make progress with the Truck Bill and the Coal Mines Bill?

was understood to say that he could not make the statement asked for, but the Bills referred to would not be taken to-night.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can now state when he hopes to take the Ordnance Factories Vote?

was unable yet, to state when the Ordnance Factories Vote would be taken.

I beg-to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that many Members are keenly opposed to the Military Land Act (1892) Amendment Bill, it is still his intention to include this Measure in the list of Bills to be proceeded with as non-contentious?

said he could not admit that the Military Lands Act (1892) Amendment Bill was opposed by any large number of Members. He thought he could show that it was a Measure which had receive support in so many quarters that he should not like to say more at the present time on the question of proceeding or not proceeding with it.