To call attention to the wholly inadequate production of food supplies within the area of the United Kingdom in relation to its large and increasing population; and to move, That, in the opinion of this House the dependence of the United Kingdom on foreign imports for the necessaries of life, and the consequences that would arise therefrom in the event of war, demand the serious attention of Her Majesty's Government. [Tuesday, 2nd March.]

To call attention to the great advance of Russian power in north-east Asia and generally; and to move a Resolution. [Tuesday, 2nd March.]

To call attention to the unequal and increasing pressure of Local and Imperial Taxation upon the Incomes of the Clergy; and to move a Resolution. [An early day.]

That, having regard to the profits made by the Post Office, it is the duty of that Department to deliver letters to all persons in Great Britain and Ireland living within a four mile radius of a Post Office. [An early day.]

To call attention to the administration of the Royal Patriotic Fund Commissioners and move a Resolution.

On going into Committee of Supply, to call attention to the subject of floating derelicts, and move, That, in view of the number of derelict ships which have been proved to be continually present on the great Atlantic Ocean steamship and sailing routes, and which are a source of danger to all ships navigating that ocean, it is desirable that Her Majesty's Government should station a cruiser or cruisers at Queenstown, or some such port on the Irish coast, charged with the duty of searching for derelicts, and towing them into harbour or destroying them, as seems best to the officer in charge.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that many girls engaged in the textile trades in Belfast, have struck against the long lists of large fines recently placarded in the mills; and, whether instructions have been given, either to the local Inspector of Factories, or to the Women's Factory-inspection Department of the Home Office, to inquire whether the proposed fines are "fair and reasonable" under the Truck Act of 1895, with a view to their carrying out the duty of enforcement of the law imposed by the Truck Act of 1887?

Yes, Sir, the strike in question has been engaging my anxious attention. I understand that many of the workpeople have returned to work, and I have been hoping that the matter would be settled by mutual agreement; if, however, this should fail, it may be necessary to have recourse to proceedings under the Track Act of last Session, which, for the first time gives the workers full protection against all unfair or unreasonable fines. It is the duty of the inspector, with whom I am in constant communication, to see that the Act is complied with, and very precise instructions have been given to him and all the inspectors on the subject.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether, in view of the admitted fall in the prices of agricultural produce in Ireland, he will consider the advisability of bringing some pressure within the law to bear on Irish landlords to induce them to give their tenants abatements in rents now due and falling due; and (2), is it his intention to employ the forces of the Crown in carrying out evictions in cases where abatements were refused, and tenants were unable to enter Court in order to have their rents revised?

I have no means of exercising influence in the direction suggested in the first paragraph of the Question. My information, however, is to the effect that landlords on many estates have given abatements in rents. There is no connection between the employment of the forces of the Crown and the refusal on the part of a landlord to grant an abatement in particular cases, as the sheriff is entitled to demand and receive the protection of the forces of the Crown in executing all decrees of Courts of Justice, and I have no option in the matter. I may add that the number of evictions throughout Ireland in the years 1895 and 1896 was lower than in any year since 1877.

asked if the statement of the right hon. Gentleman included the practical evictions, though not the physical evictions, carried out under Section 7 of the Act of 1887?

I am speaking of evictions that have actually taken place.

I beg ask the Lord Advocate whether, having regard to the numerous complaints of illegal trawling off the coasts of Scotland, he will state why the Fishery Board for Scotland have failed to give effect, so far as the Island of Lewis is concerned, to the provisions of Section 10, sub-Section (1), of the Sea Fisheries Regulation (Scotland) Act 1895, which empowers the Board to make a bye-law or bye-laws directing that the methods of fishing known as beam trawling and otter trawling shall not be used in any area or areas under the jurisdiction of Her Majesty within 13 miles of the Scottish coast; and, whether it is the intention of the Fishery Board for Scotland to make a bye-law dealing with this matter at an early date?

As the hon. Member should be aware, Section 10, sub-Section (1), of the Sea Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1895, can only be acted upon if the concurrence of the States Signatories of the North Sea Convention has been obtained. The whole question is at present engaging the earnest attention of Her Majesty's Government; but, as it involves points of great difficulty, no decision has yet been arrived at.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that four families, numbering in all 26 souls, are left homeless as the result of evictions in Carne, Connemara, the names being Pat. Mulkerrin, Letterard, seven in family; Widow Folan, Letterard, seven in family; Widow King, Mace, eight in family; and Tom Connelly, Mace, ten in family; that all the belongings of the poor people were carried outside their dwellings, the doors of the houses locked, and no one admitted back as caretakers; (2) whether the relieving officer attended these evictions, and whether he has seen any of these families since and offered them either indoor or outdoor relief; and (3) whether the Local Government Board would issue special instructions to relieving officers in future to attend such evictions and offer relief when necessary?

The persons named in the first paragraph were evicted on the 18th January for non-payment of rent. The relieving officer was present on the date specified in the eviction notices, but the evictions did not, however, take place on that date. On application being made to him by the wives of Pat Mulkerrin and Thomas Connelly he offered them relief inside the workhouse. He refused to give them out-door relief as they had cattle, sheep, and potatoes. Neither Mrs. King nor Mrs. Folan has made any application to the relieving officer for relief. As regards the last paragraph, having regard to Sections 2 and 4 of the 11 & 12 Vict., cap. 47, the Local Government Board do not consider any further special instructions are required. I may add that I am informed that Mulkerrin and Mrs. Folan have since been re-instated in their holdings.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if the mails for the Continent which should have left Dover on Saturday night the 23rd January were detained their till 10.30 a.m. on the 24th in consequence of the difficulty of entering Calias Harbour; and, if so, why they were not sent to Folkestone for shipment to Boulogne as on a previous occasion.

It is the case that the night mails for the Continent on the occasion referred to were delayed through difficulty in entering Calais Harbour during the storm; but the circumstances were not identical with those of the previous case referred to by the hon. and gallant Member. Arrangements have been concerted with the contractors and the French Post Office to meet the case of an accumulation of mails at Dover through protracted bad weather; and such an accumulation was avoided on the previous occasion by using the Boulogne route. But in cases where it is uncertain whether the Calais route will not be practicable after a short, delay, the expense of diversion from the regular route is not considered justifiable in order to avoid the chance of delay to one mail only. In the particular case of the 23rd ultimo considerable uncertainty existed, and, as it turned out, the Saturday night and Sunday morning mails were taken to Calais together on Sunday morning.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been called to the long continued complaints of the inefficiency and costliness of the local telephone service at Tunbridge Wells; whether he is aware that a large number of subscribers, owing to the impossibility of getting any improvement from the National Company, have given notice to, withdraw their subscriptions; whether he has received a Resolution, passed last week unanimously, by the Town Council of Tunbridge Wells, asking him to give a licence for the formation of a local company; whether a similar request was made to him by a deputation in May last year; and whether he will be willing to grant this request?

Yes, Sir. The attention of the Postmaster General has been called to the complaints from Tunbridge Wells. He is not aware of the number of subscribers who have given notice to withdraw their subscriptions. The Resolution passed at a meeting of the Town Council on the 6th of January duly reached the hands of the Postmaster General, who caused its receipt to be acknowledged on the 11th of January. A request for a licence to enable a local company to be established in Tunbridge Wells was made by a Deputation which was introduced to the Postmaster General on the 19th of May last by the hon. Member. Since then, the Postmaster General understands the National Telephone Company, by arrangement with the Corporation, have doubled their telephone wires and placed them underground so as to meet the complaints of inefficiency, and he has reason I believe that the service has been considerably improved. He is still in communication with the Town Council; with the Telephone Subscribers' Committee; and with the National Company, on the subject of the Telephone service at Tunbridge Wells, and he is not at present in a position to come to a decision as to the course which he should adopt.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman could give any indication when a decision might be expected; an early answer was promised to the deputation last May.

I cannot say, but I will put the matter before the Post-Master General.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has decided to recommend Her Majesty to reduce the sentence of three years' imprisonment passed on J. Hall at the Autumn Assizes in Manchester for the manslaughter of his wife, and in support of which appeal a memorial containing 12,000 signatures was presented to him at the close of last year?

I have not come to any decision at present, as I thought it desirable to communicate with the learned Judge who tried the case, and his answer has not vet reached me.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the recommendations of the Fishery Board for Scotland in the 14th Report, he is prepared to represent to the Governments of Austria and Russia the need of the reduction in the duty on herrings imported from Scotland into those countries?

We have decided, after consultation with the Secretary for Scotland, that under existing circumstances there would be no advantage in making such representations.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he has received a sworn declaration made by Colonel A. C. Turner, Colonel C. H. Spragge, Colonel J. F. Brough, and Colonel A. N. Pearse, all of the Royal Artillery, with reference to the circumstances under which 16 successful candidates who had competed for cadetships in Addiscombe College, in December 1859, with a view of obtaining commissions in the Indian Artillery and Engineers, were in December 1860 induced to accept commissions in Her Majesty's Royal Artillery or Engineers, the Government having, while these cadets were pursuing their course for the Indian Army at Addiscombe, decided not to make any more appointments to the Indian Artillery and Engineers; whether these Officers had passed the examination prescribed by the regulations for the admission of candidates for cadetships in the Engineers and Artillery of Her Majesty's Indian forces, under the 34th clause of the Act of 21 & 22 Vict., c. 106, and been sworn in as Indian cadets, and on their part had duly fulfilled the terms and conditions of the regulations; whether his attention has been particularly drawn to the statement in the declaration that early in December 1860 the 16 cadets, of whom these officers are the survivors, were asked by Sir Frederick Abbott, the Governor of Addiscombe, if, as no more appointments were to be made for India, they would accept commissions in Her Majesty's Royal Artillery or Engineers, and were assured that the privileges that would have belonged to them if appointed would be guaranteed; that £100 each was subsequently paid them towards their expenses at Addiscombe by the Indian Government, in accordance with one of the conditions under which they had received their cadetships; also that, on joining at Woolwich at Addiscombe early in 1861, 10 of the candidates, including the declarants, who obtained commissions in Her Majesty's Royal Artillery, were assured by Colonel G. Kennedy, then in command of the depôt, that if they would consent to volunteer for general service their privileges under the conditions in the regulations for admission to cadetships at Addiscombe would be preserved to them; will he explain why, in spite of these declarations, they have been retired on pension at English instead of Indian rates, and have been deprived of the benefit which would have accrued to them, had they been appointed to the Indian Army, of counting the year they spent at Addiscombe towards pension; and whether as these cadets were induced to continue their course and accept appointments in Her Majesty's Artillery by assurances officially given to them by two superior officers representing the Crown, the Government now intends to repudiate these assurances?

I can add very little to the replies made to my hon. Friend in 1895, by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Stirling District. The salient point in the case is, that these officers never were in the Indian Army, appointments to which had ceased before they came out of Addiscombe. Whatever hopes were held out by the Governor of that college were certainly unauthorised; and they were set aside in advance by the Indian General Order of the 9th December 1859, intimating that "all future appointments of cadets should be made subject to any alteration that may be decided upon."

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what has been the average strength of the Police Reserve Force at the depôt, Dublin, during the last financial year, and what was the cost of same for that year?

The average number of reserve men at the depôt during year ended 31st March 1896, was 262, including head constables; and the cost for that year, as nearly as can be ascertained was £20,190 including the pay of officers.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has been directed to Circular Letter No. 314 of the Science and Art Department which purports to explain a paragraph of the Science and Art Directory; whether he is aware that this explanation is contrary to the interpretation which has been generally placed on the regulations contained in the directory by the managers of science classes and evening continuation schools and opposed to the practice generally observed in such schools and classes; and, whether, having regard to the serious loss of grants which will result from the operation of these instructions, he will have the new regulations so modified that while one attendance may not be registered for two grants, yet grants may be made for separate attendance at science and art classes by pupils who are also attending day schools in accordance with the existing practice?

The object of the circular and the regulation to which it refers is to prevent a double grant being paid—one by the Education Department and the other by the Science and Art Department. No school need come under the regulation during the present year; there is the option of working under the present system of payment by results. The meaning of the circular is that a scholar on the register of a day elementary school cannot be also registered for an attendance grant from the Science and Art Department. It is not intended to apply to evening schools and classes. The whole subject has been referred to a Departmental Committee, which will report to the Committee of Council on the grants of the Science and Art Department and the regulations necessary to prevent their overlapping those of the Education Department.

asked if as the circular stood it would prevent pupils attending evening classes and also attending science classes from receiving separate grants.

said it would not, because during the present financial year the circular would work under the old system of payments by results, and before entering another year the Committee would report and arrangements would be made.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education if he is aware that at the public elementary school of St. Andrew's, Willesden, two certificated schoolmistresses and an assistant teacher have received notice of dismissal from the chairman of the managers of the school because they decline to sign a memorandum of agreement, by the terms of which they would have been bound to be regular communicants and attendants at the church of St. Andrew's; that an increase of salary was withheld from a certificated assistant master on the ground that he did not attend that particular church, and that finally he was dismissed because he did not so attend; and, will he cause an inquiry to be made into the management of St. Andrew's Public Elementary School, Willesden, with regard to the disposal of the public moneys granted by the State out of which the teachers are paid?

My attention has been called to the statements referred to in the first part of the hon. Member's question, and I have seen them with very great regret. [Cheers.] The Committee of Council, however, have no power to interfere in the appointment or dismissal of teachers; and, in the absence of such power, are not prepared to institute the suggested inquiry.

I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether any suggestion or remonstrance has been made with these managers, or whether the Committee of Council propose to deal with them in any way for the action they have taken?

No, Sir. The Committee of Council decline to interfere in other people's business. [Laughter.]

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether vaccination medical officers come under the provisions of the Poor Law Superannuation Act of 1896; and, if not, whether he will take steps to amend the Act in this respect?

The Local Government Board are of opinion that neither under the Superannuation Act of 1864, nor under the Act of last Session, is a Public Vaccinator who is paid by fees under a contract, an officer to whom a superannuation could be granted. I am not contemplating any alteration of the law in this respect.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate upon what principle the Scotch Education Department now refuses to continue to pay the additional grant claimed by certain Scotch School Boards in virtue of that part of Section 67 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1872?

I understand the hon. Member's Question to refer to the case of scholars in evening schools. The Scottish Education Department has had the matter under its consideration, and has taken legal opinion. It is advised that in view of the fact that there is now no restriction of age in the case of scholars in evening schools, and as such schools are not part of the accommodation which it is compulsory on School Boards to provide, this attendance cannot be included in reckoning the average attendance in the sense of the section referred to.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the charges for interest and repayment of principal on loans to tenants advanced by the Board of Works, Ireland, amount to £7 10s. per cent. per annum; and will he, in view of the straitened circumstances of tenant farmers in Ireland, consider the advisability of extending the period for repayment of those loans, so as to give immediate relief to the occupiers of agricultural holdings without entailing any pecuniary loss on the Treasury?

Tenants' loans are repayable by an annuity of 6½ per cent. per annum for 22 years (covering interest at about £3 8s. per annum) unless the tenant desires to pay within a shorter period, when he has the option of increasing the amount of the annual instalments to such an amount as will repay the loan in the period selected by him. No loan is granted unless the estimated value of the anticipated improvement to be derived from the works is greater than the annuity. As the hon. Member is aware, the general question of the rate of loans is now under the consideration of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed on the 25th January by the Old-castle Board of Guardians, stating that in consequence of the high local tariffs and low preferential through rates Irish Railway Companies are imposing such burdens on Irish commerce as will tend to crush it; and, (2) whether he is prepared to recommend the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the feasibility and desirability of State purchase of Irish Railways, as to work them economically for the benefit of the entire country?

I have received a copy of the resolution referred to in the first part of the Question. As regards the second paragraph, it has already been pointed out that the suggested State purchase of railways in Ireland has been considered by two Royal Commissions which sat in 1865 and 1886. I see no reason for the appointment of a third Royal Commission to go over the same ground again after so brief an interval.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord lieutenant of Ireland whether complaints have reached him of the flooding of all the lowlands on the banks of the tributary streams which flow into the River Shannon from Rooskey, county Roscommon, to Athlone; whether it is the fact that a large volume of water is kept unnecessarily back by the shutting down of the floodgates at Tarmonbarry and also at Athlone; whether such a course is an absolute necessity for navigation purposes; and whether any steps can be taken to so widen and deepen the River Camlin as to prevent the disastrous floods that continually occur in county Longford?

I am informed that every stream in the Shannon district was flooded, and that the flood was about an ordinary winter flood. The Rooskey and Tarmon sluices were all opened. At Tarmon the sluices were not running full, and the surface of the water above the sluices was at or below the summer level. With a view to protecting the low-lying land along the river between Athlone and Meelick, 27 miles, the Athlone sluices were either not opened or only slightly opened, but Lough Rea (above Athlone) did not rise so as to cause much flooding. The navigation was not in any way affected by the sluices, and was not taken into consideration. No works are in contemplation by the Government on the Camlin River, which has its own Local Drainage Board.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the staff of the British Museum are the only officials in the State-supported institutions of the Metropolis who are deprived of the Saturday half-holiday all the year round; and, whether it would be possible, by working with a reduced staff or in some other manner satisfactory to the trustees, to make a concession of alternate Saturday afternoons to those hard-working and deserving officials?

I know of no light to a Saturday half-holiday, except that which is allowed by the two Orders in Council of 1890 to the Higher and Second Divisions. That right is confined to alternate Saturdays and is only when the Department is a seven hours' office, and then only on condition that the Head of the Department is satisfied that the state of public business will permit of it. The assistants in the British Museum are only required to attend six hours per diem, so they have not even this contingent claim under the Order in Council. If the hon. Member is referring to the attendants, they have no claim to a half-holiday. Whether it would be possible to do as he suggests is a question not for the Treasury, but for the trustees of the British Museum to decide. I understand that the trustees have already considered the matter, and have decided that it would be impossible, on the ground that Saturday afternoon above all others, is the time when there is generally most pressure, owing to the increased attendance of the public.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Great Northern Railway of Ireland shunt trains over a level crossing entering the town of Castleblaney, causing delay and danger to the people who use this crossing; and, whether his Department have been able to take any steps during the Recess to induce the Great Northern Railway Company of Ireland to erect a bridge over the railway there?

The Board of Trade have this morning received a letter from the Company, in which it is stated that the Directors have decided to put up a footbridge over this level crossing; and that their engineer has been instructed to communicate with the Town Commissioners at Castleblaney, with a view to coming to an arrangement as to the position of the bridge which will suit all purposes.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman would take into account the fact that the railway company shunted over this level crossing, and that it was only a footbridge they were going to erect?

said he was aware that it was a footbridge the company were going to erect, but he could not give any further answer to the question.

said he would raise the question on the Estimates.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he can state when the Bill to deal with the £15,000 voted last year in aid of Congested Districts in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland will be introduced?

I can only tell the hon. Member that no date can as yet be fixed for the introduction of the Bill in question.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can now state when the construction of the lighthouse on Tiumpan Head, Island of Lewis, will be commenced?

Although the Board of Trade have sanctioned the establishment of a light on Tiumpan Head, I am not yet able to say when, having regard to the claims of other works also under consideration, the state of the Mercantile Marine Fund will admit of the work being commenced.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, and, if so, when, he proposes to introduce a Bill to extend to Scotland the provisions of the Post Office Amendment Act, 1895?

I hope that I may be able to introduce a Bill this session which will deal with the matter to which the hon. Member refers.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the fact that many of the younger children attending school in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland are unable to speak English, the inspectors visiting such schools will be authorised to question the children in Gaelic whenever such a course seems desirable, as is already done in Welsh in the schools of Wales?

I must remind the hon. Member that Article 19 of the Code directs that in districts where Gaelic is spoken the intelligence of the children may be tested by requiring them to explain in Gaelic the meaning of any passage read or recited.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Government propose to bring in a Bill to extend the benefits of the Crofters Act, 1886, to tenants holding under lease in the crofting counties of Scotland at rentals of £30 and under?

No, Sir; Her Majesty's Government are not convinced that a case cm be made out for the alteration of the law suggested in the hon. Member's Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that, under existing arrangements, a national teacher in Ireland of the first class, assuming he commences to teach at the age of 18 years, would, after 20 years' service, be entitled to a pension of only £6 a year and that a third-class teacher would' after 30 years' service, be entitled to a pension of only £10 a year; is he aware that the Irish National Teachers' Pension Fund is insolvent through no fault of the teachers but through mistakes made by Government actuaries; and will the fund be placed in a position of solvency by special grant, and without deducting for such purpose any sum from the arrears of school grant due to Ireland under the Education Act of 1892?

The pensions at the two periods would, I understand, be those stated in the Question. In practice the teachers prefer a gratuity to a pension—and they would receive £95 and £116 respectively. English teachers entered since 1862 receive no pension. It is not possible within the limits of an answer to explain the causes which have led to the present condition of the fund, but one important cause is the fact that existing teachers are paying much less than is required to produce one-fourth of the benefits, and have thus materially profited by the error in the original calculation. The steps to be taken to place the fund in a sound position are now engaging the attention of the Government.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it is a fact that an Irish national teacher who commences to teach at the age of 18 years can claim full pension only after a service of 43 to 46 years; is there any other department of the public service in which so long a term of service is required in order to secure full pension; and could he state what are the periods of service after which teachers in elementary schools in Great Britain are permitted to retire on full pension?

I understand that the teacher described would, if a man, receive full pension at the age of 61, after 43 years' service; and if a woman, at 58, after 40 years' service. The teachers are pensionable under a special code. But I may say it frequently happens in the Civil Service that the full pension is not earned until after more than 40 years' service. I am informed that no teacher in Great Britain who entered since 1862 is entitled to pension, and that the rules under which pensions are given to those who entered before 1862 are so different from the Irish system that no comparison can be instituted; but I believe them to be on the whole not more favourable to the teachers than the Irish system.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that the Roman Catholic and Protestant Managers of National Schools in Ireland and the Teachers Organisation have repeatedly called for the reduction of the average necessary for the employment of assistant teachers, and that the Commissioners of National Education last year, by a unanimous vote, requested the Treasury for sufficient funds to enable them to meet the proposed alteration; (2) whether he will use his influence with the Treasury so as to secure the necessary net grant to meet the views of the Commissioners; and (3) will he recommend that the assistant teachers at present threatened with withdrawal of salary, owing to the refusal of the Treasury to accede to the recommendations of the Board of Education, shall be retained in the pay of the Commissioners pending a settlement of the question?

Representations have been made as stated in the first paragraph of the Question. The Estimates for the coming financial year are now closed, but I shall be prepared again to bring the matter before the Treasury in connection with the Estimates for the year 1898–99 should the Commissioners so desire. As regards the last paragraph, the Commissioners have no power to continue payment to assistant teachers where the conditions of the existing Rules as to the average daily attendance for assistants are not fulfilled.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that in five-eighths of the number of Irish National Schools at present the staff consists of one recognised teacher only, single teachers being thus responsible in over 5,000 schools for the efficient teaching of eight standards on 40 different part subjects daily; and (2) whether the Commission of Inquiry respecting the employment of manual labour in National Schools will take into consideration the exceptional circumstances of rural schools in Ireland, and inquire into the educational soundness of making the staff of such schools dependent upon attendance rather than upon the number of classes and subjects taught?

There is only one teacher in about five out of eight National Schools, but in a very large number of these schools, where the average daily attendance is sufficient, the teacher is aided by one or two paid monitors. In practice, the individual daily instruction alluded to in the second paragraph is not given, nor is it necessary for the efficient instruction of the classes, and certainly no teacher is held responsible for such an arrangement. The general arrangement is to have certain subjects taught on only two, or perhaps three, days in the week. As regards the third paragraph, the Commission has been appointed to inquire how far and in what form manual and practical instruction should be included in the educational system of the primary schools under the Board of National Education. I am unable to say whether the Commission will consider the Question referred to by the hon. Member as coming within the scope of the reference to them.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if there is any truth in the rumour of scurvy having been prevalent among the Indian troops at Suakin and Tokar last year.

The Indian troops at Suakin were attacked for a short time by a sudden outbreak of scurvy, during which two British officers, 103 men, and 85 followers were admitted to hospital, suffering from this complaint. In about a month—viz., by the beginning of November—it was completely eradicated, and the general officer commanding was able to report that "by the middle of November, so far as the men were concerned, the force was as fit to take the field as it was on its arrival in the country."

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants in the townlands of Moylemore and Moylebeg, on the estate of Major Leslie, county Monaghan, have applied to the Irish Land Commisioners to purchase the landlord's mortgage on their holdings; and that the Irish Land Commissioners have replied that the recent Irish Land Act does not give them power to deal with such cases; and whether he will bring in a Bill this Session to give relief to tenants such as those referred to?

The Land Commissioners are unable to trace any such application as is referred to in this Question. I have already replied to the second paragraph of the Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state when he intends introducing the Bill to prevent the deportation of paupers from England and Scotland to Ireland.

I have again and again explained that any Bill which would provide a real remedy for the grievance complained of could not emanate from the Irish Office, as it would have to deal with the Poor Law as it now exists in England and Scotland. I am unable, therefore, to answer the question of the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether information has reached him that some Christian peasants returning to their villages were attacked near the gate of Canea by an armed band of Mahomedans on the evening of the 26th ultimo, several of them maltreated or wounded, and their mules and baggage taken from them; that great excitement prevails in Canea, and all the shops have been closed; and that some Christians were wounded outside the gates of Heraklion on the 27th ultimo; and whether any representations have been addressed by the representations of the Powers to the Vali of Crete or to the Government of the Porte respecting these alleged attacks upon the persons and properties of Christian subjects?

We have not heard of the particular incident at Canea mentioned in the Question. Put during the past few weeks there have been frequent alarms in the towns, owing to the immigration of Mussulmans from the country districts, and there have been murders, both of Christians and Mussulmans. The foreign ships of war have produced a calming effect by their presence at the ports, and movement to the threatened quarters. The Turkish authorities appear to be doing their utmost to maintain order and restore confidence, and the foreign Consuls are in close communication with them. The continuance of peace depends largely upon the organisation of the new gendarmerie which is being rapidly proceeded with.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any allowance will be made to Officers of the Army who have been ordered to provide themselves with the new mess waistcoat and patrol jacket in addition to the new sword hilts of last year; when the new helmet is to be taken into use; and why Officers are put to such expense in the matter of uniform?

No change has been made in the mess waistcoat, but a loss expensive mess jacket and patrol jacket have been introduced for infantry officers, and ample time has been allowed for those now in use to be worn out. As the object of the change has been to make officers' uniforms more serviceable and less expensive, and as the change is known to have been very generally desired by the officers concerned, no necessity for compensation is likely to arise. No decision has yet been come to as to the introduction of a helmet of a new pattern.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury (1) whether it is a fact that since the year 1876 the Government has paid on an assessment of £3,385 on Netley Hospital; (2) whether this sum represents about one-fourth the estimated annual value; and (3) whether he will consider the desirability of having a new valuation made of Netley Hospital?

The answer to the first paragraph is, Yes. The Local Assessment Committee accepted this valuation as satisfactory in 1876, and have never asked for a revision until last July. The Treasury at once expressed their readiness to make a new valuation, and on July 18th, and again on January 18th, asked for information from the Assessment Committee which has not yet been supplied to them.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government are prepared to give an assurance that an equivalent grant will be given to Scotland in proportion to the sum proposed to be given to the Voluntary Schools in England?

We do not think, as was stated last year, that the system of "equivalent grants" is properly applicable to the matter dealt with in my right hon. Friend's Bill; but should this Bill become law, no doubt fair aid will be given to primary education in Scotland, in such manner as may be suitable to the educational requirements of the country.

May I ask upon what basis that aid will be calculated, or when the right hon. Gentleman will be able to make a statement on the subject?

I imagine any proposals of the kind could not be introduced until it was seen what the result may be of the Bill which my right hon. Friend introduced last night. ["Hear, hear!"]

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether it was with the consent of the Post Office authorities that the time of departure of the Irish day mail train was altered from 7.30 a.m. to 7.15, in order to allow a Scotch connection to be made; whether, since the establishment of the Irish mail service in 1860, the day and night trains to and from London have been run at the same rate of speed; whether, under the proposed new time table, the day mail service is to be run at a slower speed than the night train; and, whether he will endeavour to have the day service run at the same speed as the proposed accelerated night service, and thus convenience the public by an hour's later start at Euston and Dublin respectively?

The dispatch of the Irish day mail train from Euston was altered from 7.30 a.m. to 7.15 a.m. in 1867, but it was not until 1872 that the Irish train was utilised for the conveyance of the Scotch bags. It is the case that the Irish day and night trains have since 1860 been run at practically the same rate of speed. Under the new time table the acceleration of the trains will be confined to the night mail. The acceleration of the day mail trains would be attended with considerable additional expense, which the advantage to the mail service is not held to justify. The convenience of half-an-hour's later start from Dublin has been conceded to passengers under the new time table, but in regard to the dispatch from London the postal advantage is entirely on the side of maintaining the present dispatch of 7.15 a.m.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will lay upon the Table of this House the text of the Arbitration Treaty between this country and the United States as recently signed?

If the hon. Member will put a Motion upon the Paper for the production of the Treaty, Her Majesty's Government will have no objection to lay it on the Table.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he has received any and, if so, what representations on the subject of the new Order for the election of parish councils, which deprives one elector of the right to demand a poll for the election of parish councillors, and orders that a poll cannot be taken unless the chairman assents, or it is demanded by five electors present at the meeting, or by one-third of those present, whichever number is least?

I have received no representation since the Order referred to was issued, adverse to the course which has been adopted in this matter.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman apart from representations, whether he has considered if this Order does not contravene the words of the Statute, inasmuch as it takes away from the electors the power to demand a poll on a question of expense?

I think, Sir, the Order is strictly carried out.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) whether his attention has been called to the circumstance that English steam trawlers have been habitually fishing within the prescribed limits on the coast of the county Down; that some weeks ago three of them were arrested by the coastguard off St. John's Point, prosecuted, and fined the maximum penalty at the Castlewellan Petty Sessions, an amount for which one night's fishing amply recoups them; that the coastguard, though successful in this instance, can rarely catch the offenders, who are able to steam away from their sailing or rowing boats; and (2) whether under these circumstances, he will appeal to the Admiralty to assist in preventing the destruction of the spawning grounds and the ruin of the fishery; or, if that department is unwilling to undertake that duty, he will consider the propriety of organising a water police supplied with steam launches to protect this very important Irish industry?

The facts are substantially as stated in the first paragraph, though I am unable to ascertain what was the value of one night's fishing. On many occasions the coastguard could not come up with the steam trawlers. The question of providing a gunboat for the purpose of preventing illegal fishing by the steam trawlers, and of protecting the fisheries is now under the consideration of Government.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that considerable; disappointment prevails at the delay in issuing a medal for the Chitral campaign; whether he can explain the cause of this delay; and whether the Secretary of State for War will make some representation in the proper quarter with a view to hastening the issue of this medal?

I greatly regret any disappointment caused by the delay in issuing the Chitral medal. The delay is practically due to a proposal from the Government of India, that in place of a clasp being added to the existing frontier medal an altogether new medal should be struck and issued to note the services of this very successful expedition. This involved the selection and execution of a design—a necessarily lengthy process. The dies were sent to India on January 1st, and I presume the medals are now being struck.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether any decision has yet been arrived at by the Military authorities with regard to the Hulme Cavalry Barracks; what troops are now occupying the said barracks; how long such troops have been there; and whether it is intended to make any immediate change with regard to cavalry barracks being occupied by infantry soldiers?

The Hulme Barracks are at present occupied by infantry, who have been there since the autumn. No immediate change is contemplated.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to a letter signed "George Rowley," in The North Wales Observer and Express, of 8th January, 1897, in which he states, with reference to his appointment as Local Labour Correspondent to the Board of Trade, that his duty as correspondent was to obtain all information possible from the locality from secretaries of associations, etc., and forward them to the Board of Trade; that he received his appointment through the recommendation of several Welsh Members, well-known Radicals; that on labour questions he had been a trade unionist all his life, taken a leading part for more than twenty years, and had had a large experience of strikes of all kinds; that he was President of the Miners' Federation for some years; and only the other day was Chairman of a Welsh meeting at Cefnmawr for the purpose of raising subscriptions on behalf of the Bethesda men; and, whether the writer of this letter was specially instructed by the Board of Trade to visit Bethesda for the purpose of making inquiries as to the dispute at the Penrhyn Quarries, and his report thereupon received previous to the Department openly intervening in the matter?

I have just seen the letter, and assuming it to be as printed, it is a highly improper letter, and Mr. Rowley's explanation has been called for. Local correspondents are not permanent officials of the Board of Trade but persons able to supply information with regard to employment, and their reports are considered along with information obtained from other sources. The statement in the letter as quoted with regard to the mode in which the selection of Mr. Rowley was made is incorrect. When the Board of Trade first became aware of the prospect of a serious dispute in the Bethesda Quarries, they instructed Mr. Rowley in the ordinary course to supply them with information as to the facts, and a report was received from him under the date of September 15th. I think it would be satisfactory that I should read it to the House. It is as follows:—

"As instructed, I have visited the quarry district of Bethesda for the purpose of making inquiries as to the dispute in progress at the Penrhyn quarries I find that Lord Penrhyn is at present investigating the alleged grievances, and is in communication with the leaders of the men with a view to an amicable arrangement. The men continue working, but much anxiety exists in the locality owing to the decided inclination of the men to strike. Feeling runs so high that the slightest hitch in the proceedings will bring the men out. Every effort is being made by the committee and leaders to counteract this. It is thought that by Lord Penrhyn personally investigating the grievances matters will be put right. Public, sympathy in the locality is with the men. They say that the wages earned in some instances by good practical quarrymen are much lower than what has been reported, only that the men do not care to come forward. Great dissatisfaction is expressed at the way in which contracts are let to non-practical persons, to the exclusion of the men who have been apprenticed to and worked at the trade all their lives. The quarry is worked in ponks or galleries of 100 or 150 yards in length, in which the quantity of rubbish and quality of the slate varies. The most unprofitable parts are sublet to the men who have not been fortunate in securing a gallery, and this, as a matter of course, places them at a great disadvantage; and these are the men who are seeking a minimum day's wage, or a more equal distribution of the advantages with the disadvantages. This information I received from different individuals in the neighbourhood of the quarries. I passed through the quarry as an ordinary visitor during the dinner hour, and I saw several meetings of the men hero and there discussing the situation. The decision of Lord Penrhyn is anxiously awaited."

It is true that I interposed during the speech of my right hon. Friend the member for Thanet on Thursday last, owing to the repetition by him of an allegation which had been previously made by my hon. Friend the member for Macclesfield to the effect that the Board of Trade had been guided during their negotiations with Lord Penrhyn by information derived from the local correspondent of the Board of Trade. This allegation I then denied. This denial I emphatically repeat. I stated that no communication had been received from the local correspondent during the time of the negotiations. This statement is strictly accurate, but on the following day I ascertained that under the date of September 18th, prior to the commencement of negotiations and nearly a fortnight before the date of letter No. 1 in the published correspondence, which was the first letter asking for the Board's intervention, a communication had been received from the local correspondent. It was of no importance, and contained no advice to the Board, and no opinion whatever on the merits of the case. This communication had entirely escaped my recollection, and I at once ordered a copy of it to be sent to may right hon Friend, as I wished to be perfectly frank with him. ["Hear, hear!"] No further communication was held on the subject with the labour correspondent. In fact any such further communication with him was forbidden. No advice was asked. No advice was given, nor was any concealment attempted. On the contrary, Mr. Rowley's report was shown to Lord Penrhyn by Lord Dudley when he saw him at Penrhyn Castle, so that all along Lord Penrhyn had been in full possession of the communication referred to. ["Hear, hear!"]

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that the report which he has read was in reply to a special request addressed to this person to go and make enquiries?

It was a request made in the ordinary course of business. It is the duty of the Board of Trade to make themselves acquainted with all labour movements, and, in accordance with the usual practice, when it was seen in the newspapers that a dispute had occurred which was likely to end in a strike, the local correspondent was asked to furnish the Board, not with any opinion of his own, but with information as to the facts connected with the matter. ["Hear, hear!"]

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether Lord Penrhyn was at liberty to disclose the letter which he has just read, or whether it was shown him by Lord Dudley strictly under the seal of confidence?

Strictly in confidence.

had the following Question on Paper:—

"To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention had been called to a report in The Westminster Gazette of last Friday, of an alleged interview with Sir Courtenay Boyle, in the course of which Sir Courtenay Boyle is represented as having stated that he had himself received a letter upon the subject of the dispute at the Penrhyn Slate Quarries from a local labour correspondent of the Board of Trade; whether, in as much as this letter was an official communication from Mr. George Rowley, dated 17th December 1896, stating that, as instructed, he had visited the quarry district of Bethesda for the purpose of making inquiries as to the dispute in progress at the Penrhyn Quarry, which letter was minuted and initialed by the principal officials of the Board of Trade, including the President himself, he will now qualify the official statement that there was no communication whatever between that correspondent and the Board of Trade, the President, or any one connected with the Board of Trade in connection with this dispute during any time of the negotiations, end no communication was received nor invited from this gentleman with regard to the dispute in the Penrhyn Quarries; and, will he explain to the House the apparent discrepancies between the statements of Sir Courtenay Boyle and himself?"

The Question which stands in the name of the hon. Member for Macclesfield is irregular and ought not to appear on the Paper, because it refers to a previous Debate in this House, and questions a statement there made. But as the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, in answering a question of the right hon. Member for Thanet, did give a kind of anticipatory answer to the question of the hon. Member for Macclesfield, and went with great detail into what has taken place with reference to that Debate, I think it only fair that the hon. Member should be allowed to put his Question or ask the right hon. Gentleman any further question.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he adheres to the statement that no communication was received or invited from this gentleman with regard "to the dispute in the Penrhyn quarries. We heard nothing from him and we made no inquiry."

I hardly think it is necessary for me to make any further statement. I would point out to my hon. Friend that I have already said in this House that this communication, occurring as it did, prior to the opening of the negotiations, had escaped my memory. It is quite clear that in answering the question of my hon. Friend I was dealing with the period during which these negotiations had been going on, which period was closely within my recollection. In the question my hon. Friend now puts he asks whether my attention has been called to the report

"in the Westminster Gazette of last Friday of an alleged interview with Sir Courtenay Boyle, in the course of which Sir Courtenay Boyle is represented as having stated that he had himself received a letter upon the subject of the dispute at the Penrhyn slate quarries."

Oh, no; that is not the point.

But I should like an answer to that.

I am asked by Sir Courtenay Boyle to say that the account, which was published without his authority, differs totally from what really occurred, and that he made no such statements as those attributed to him. Going back to the point about which my hon. Friend asked me, namely, whether I

"will now qualify the official statement that there was no communication whatever between that correspondent and the Board of Trade, the President, or anyone connected with the Board of Trade in connection with this dispute during any time of the negotiations,"

that was the statement I made. If I had recollected that there was this prior communication I should, of course, have stated so. I did not recollect it, because it was not within the area of the time of the negotiations, and anyone who heard me, in the Debate, use the expression I did, must have known that I was dealing with the time during which the negotiations took place. [Cheers.]

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is in accordance with the official practice for permanent officials to make statements or speeches for publication?

I confess I did not see the statement which was published in the Westminster Gazette. Sir Courtenay Boyle sent it to me on Friday night. When I saw him subsequently, he stated that someone from the Westminster Gazette came with a view of asking him one or two questions in regard to the correspondence which had been published, and that he answered those questions without the slighest idea that he was being interviewed. [Laughter.] I am afraid he showed a guileless simplicity which one would have hardly suspected. [Laughter.] But I can quite understand how it arose. Some information was asked as to the correspondence that had been published. Sir Courtenay Boyle answered with a view of making some points clear, but he had no idea of being interviewed. [Laughter.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman recommend his officials to exercise greater caution in the future?

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education when a Supplementary Estimate will be presented to provide, during the current financial year, for the hitherto unclaimed or unpaid grants to necessitous School Boards, under Section 97 of The Elementary Education Act 1870, for which provision was not made in the Education Votes passed last Session; and what the amount so pro-provided in the Supplementary Estimate for this purpose will be?

The Supplementary Estimate which the Committee of Council will shortly submit to the Treasury for presentation to this House will include a sum of nearly £20,000 for paying such claims referred to as are admissible.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that on the piece of land recently taken by the War Office for the construction of a rifle range at Finner, county Donegal, a cairn of great antiquity, which is held in great veneration by the people of the district, and is believed to contain the ashes of some Irish chiefs, is being demolished and the material used in the construction of the range; and whether, as this cairn stands on the highest part of the land and would not in any way interfere with its use, and as the necessary material can be got elsewhere in the neighbourhood, he will instruct the military authorities to stop further demolition of the cairn?

Inquiries are necessary before I can answer this question fully. Meanwhile, orders have been telegraphed to stop any destruction of the cairn if it is going on.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, having regard to the nature of the Report furnished at the close of the inquiry into the condition of the Mercantile Marine Fund, if he can state what steps are in contemplation for the redress of the grievances of the lighthouse keepers of the United Kingdom; and whether, since petitions have been repeatedly forwarded by English and Scotch lighthouse keepers to their respective Boards, and the Irish petition has remained for two years unacknowledged, he will promise to grant a Commission of some kind to inquire into these grievances and to examine witnesses from each branch of the service?

The Board of Trade have quite recently received applications from the Trinity House and the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses for improvement in the present pay and the prospective pensions of lightkeepers in their service. These applications are both under consideration. No application has as yet been received from the Commissioners of Irish Lights with regard to the same matter. If any is received it will be duly considered, but the Board of Trade have no power to act without such application.

asked when it was likely that action would be taken in the direction of dealing with the lighthouse keepers?

I have stated that the applications have only quite recently been received. There will he no delay in considering them.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether his attention has been drawn to the report of an inquest, held at West Bromwich on the 27th January before Mr. Betham, deputy coroner, from which it appears that a surgeon, being called to give evidence, desired to be sworn according to the Scottish form, whereupon the deputy coroner professed his ignorance of the Scottish oath and stated that he was not bound to administer the oath in that form; whether, under the provisions of the Oaths Act 1888, the administration of the oath in the Scottish form was imperative upon the court in the circumstances stated; and if so, whether, he would communicate with the Lord Chancellor, with a view to the attention of coroners and county court judges being called to the matter; and, whether, having regard to the strong representations of the medical faculty as to the danger of infection from "kissing the book," he will consider the advisability of extending generally the practice of the Lambeth County Court namely to place printed notices in a conspicuous position in the courts calling public attention to the provisions of the Act which permit the Scottish form of oath as an alternative.

In answer to the hon. and learned Member's question, I am informed by the deputy coroner that he did not state that he was not bound to administer the oath in Scotch form. On the contrary, he was prepared to accept it if the witness could remember the form of it; the deputy coroner not then having the form by him. The witness was not required to kiss the book; his unsworn evidence being accepted. Under the provisions of the Oaths Act 1888, the administration of the oath in Scotch form is to be permitted if it is desired by the witness, and a circular has been issued by the Home Office calling the special attention of coroners and deputy coroners to these provisions; and I shall be pleased to show the hon and learned Member a copy of it if he desires to see it.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the attention of the Government has been directed to the Report and Recommendations of the Select Committee appointed to inquire into the administrations of the various funds controlled by the Commissioners of the Royal Patriotic Fund, which has reported that there is immediately available from the total assets recently valued at £1,086,000 for the further relief of widows, children, and dependent relatives of soldiers, sailors, and marines who have lost their lives in the service of the Crown, a surplus approximating half a million sterling; and whether any steps have been taken for the prompt issue of a Supplementary Commission, under Clause 4 of the Patriotic Act of 1881, to deal with such surplus funds which have accrued and may hereafter accrue as recommended by the Committee?

The recommendations of the Committee are under the consideration of the Secretary of State for War and the First Lord of the Admiralty. I cannot find in the Report to which the hon. Member refers any statement that there is immediately available a surplus approximating half a million sterling, nor would, I am informed, such a statement be in accordance with the fact.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether recent local legislation affecting the aborigines of Western Australia has been vetoed by Her Majesty's Government; and, if so, whether there is any objection to stating the grounds on which the Imperial veto has been exercised in this instance?

No recent legislation affecting the aborigines of Western Australia has been vetoed. A new Bill was passed by the Legislature of that colony in 1894, to repeal Section 70 of the Constitution Act, which appropriates 1 per cent. of the colonial revenue for the use of the Aborigines Protection Board. This Measure was reserved by the Acting Governor, and has not yet been assented to. Considerable correspondence has passed with the colonial Government, which is now in the hands of the printer, and will, I trust, shortly be ready for presentation.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the proposed repeal of so much of Section 19 of the Education Act 1876, as imposes a limit on the Parliamentary grant to day schools is intended to carry with it the repeal of Section 53, which applies the same conditions to Scotland?

The Bill does not refer to Scotland, and does not touch the question of the 17s. 6d. limit in respect to Scotland.

asked whether the First Lord of the Treasury could now inform the House when he would be in a position to lay upon the Table the terms of reference to the Royal Commission on Financial Relations which he had promised to submit to Parliament at any early date?

The references to Royal Commissions are not usually laid upon the Table, but I shall be prepared next week in answer to a question to give the terms of reference to this Commission.

announced that the business in Committee of Supply on Friday would be the consideration of the grant in aid in connection with the Egyptian Expedition.

Which will come first—the grant in aid for the Indian troops or the grant of £500,000?

The grant to the Egyptian Government.