I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in reference to the Report recommending the immediate rebuilding of the greater part of South Kensington Museum, and the necessity which has arisen for acquiring a house for the Hertford Collection, he will consider the wisdom of spreading the charge over a period of years, as has been done for Naval works and for Military works in the Naval Works Acts of several Sessions and in the Military Works Act of the present Session?

The matter will be considered in connection with the large expenditure which must soon be incurred for Government buildings generally, and so long as the money borrowed is repaid by terminable annuities in a reasonable period, I think there is a good deal to be said for such a policy.

Arising out of that Question, I wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether or not there is any truth in the rumour that the South Kensington Museum will be closed for a number of years?

I do not think any decision has been arrived at. But it seems to me that it will probably be necessary that some of the valuable objects in that Museum shall be removed from places where they are now in danger. ["Hear, hear!"] The Government have under consideration the necessity of rebuilding —["hear, hear!"]—and I think the removal of those objects is a matter that will have to be dealt with first.

Will an opportunity of discussing the matter be given the House?

Not the question of removal.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the officials of a telegraph office have a right to detain or withhold telegrams on the ground of insufficient address, when letters similarly addressed are delivered without question; and whether directions will be given that an address recognised as sufficient to insure delivery of letters shall be recognised as sufficient to insure delivery of telegrams?

The Postmaster General is advised that he is under no obligation to treat telegrams and letters in a precisely similar manner as regards delivery, the conditions of delivery in the two cases being widely different. A telegram is an urgent communication, and it is of its essence that it should have prompt delivery. Consequently it is delivered by special messenger, and not by a postman on his round; and it is the universal rule that the address should contain the necessary particulars to insure delivery without difficulty, and without inquiries or references to directories. Although this is the rule, the Department does take trouble to deliver telegrams the addresses of which appear to be defective by accident and not by design, but it would be contrary to the interests of that public that it should allow its officers' time to be spent in procuring the delivery of telegrams which are systematically sent with insufficient addresses. Not only would the telegrams in question be delayed, but telegrams bearing sufficient addresses would also be delayed, and the whole character of the service would be altered for the worse. In the circumstances the Postmaster General is not prepared to give the directions which the hon. Member suggests.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that a scheme is on foot to illuminate the Dome of St. Paul's on 22nd June; and whether, in view of the great risk of fire in the Metropolitan Cathedral, he will prevent its being carried out?

The Dean of St. Paul's informs me that a proposal was made to him that the Dome should be illuminated, but he had stated that he would not give his consent until he had obtained competent technical advice as to the safety of the scheme to be proposed. The hon. Baronet may rest assured, I think, that no scheme will be approved unless all risks are properly guarded against. ["Hear, hear!"]

Then nothing will be done without the consent of the Home Office? The City authorities are very much exercised about the matter.

Certainly, Sir. I have been in communication again with the Dean and Chapter on the subject, and I have every reason to believe that nothing will be done which will involve any risk. ["Hear, hear!"]

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the Royal Victorian Order is to be conferred at the Jubilee on the surviving officers who served in the Crimea and in the Mutiny, the Secretary of State will take steps also to make some special provision for the surviving privates and non-commissioned officers who served in those campaigns, and who have hitherto been excluded from pensions by the existing regulations?

There is no authority for the statement as to the distribution of the Victorian Order suggested in the Question. Non-commissioned officers and men who served in the Crimean or Indian Mutiny campaigns who have not pensions under the ordinary warrants are granted special campaign pensions provided they have given ten years' service and are in necessitous circumstances. It it not proposed to go further.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the only service not represented in the Jubilee Procession of 22nd June by Her Majesty's Aides-de-camp is that of the Royal Navy; whether he is aware that there is a strong feeling both in the service and in the country as to the inadequacy of representation of the Royal Navy generally at public functions; and whether he will endeavour to remedy this grievance?

I understand that some of Her Majesty's naval and marine Aides-de-camp will be directed to ride in the Jubilee Procession. With reference to the second Question of my hon. and gallant Friend, I am always as anxious as he can be that the Navy should be adequately represented at public functions, though, as so large a proportion of the service is employed at sea, there are occasions of functions on shore in which it is difficult for them to participate in the same proportion as sonic other services. I should be sorry to think there was any widespread feeling of grievance, as the hon. and gallant Gentleman suggests. I am sure that every one must be anxious to see justice done to the Navy in ceremonials as well as in other respects.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether it is with his authority a notice is still exhibited within the precincts of the House that no Member unprovided with a ticket will be admitted to Westminster Hall on 22nd of June?

I informed the hon. Member on Tuesday last that I had given no authority to exclude Members from Westminster Hall on June 22. The notice in question was not exhibited by my instructions, and has, I understand, since been withdrawn. ["Hear, hear!"] I may add that in giving my consent to the use of Westminster Hall for luncheon on June 22 for the convenience of Members of the House and their friends I was acting on the request of a Select Committee of the House and in furtherance of what I believed, and still believe, to be the wish of a large majority of this House. [Cheers.] While I would not exclude from Westminster Hall any Member of the House on that day, the hon. Member must understand I certainly do not withdraw my consent to the use of the Hall for luncheon. ["Hear, hear!"]

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state how many seats have been allotted by the India Office to the Officers of the Army in India at present on leave in England?

I stated on Monday that the seats at the disposal of the India Office for the civil and military services had been allotted to those in this country who were considered to have the best claims, without regard to the question whether they were on leave or not. It would servo no useful purpose to give all analysis of the distribution of the tickets among the various branches of the service.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he is able to state to the House the number of military bands that will play in London on Jubilee Day, and also the arrangements that will be made to insure this pleasure for the people; and how many of these bands will conic from Aldershot and from Shorncliffe?

As far as arrangements are at present completed, 63 bands will take part in the ceremonial on Jubilee Day, exclusive of those bands joining in the service at St. Paul's. Thirty bands will conic from Aldershot and three from Dover.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is able to give any further information as to the arrangements for the street traffic on Jubilee Day?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what police arrangements will be made as regards permitting the resumption of either pedestrian or vehicular traffic in the streets to be traversed by the Procession on June 22nd, after the Procession will have passed?

I am not in a position to give this information at present, but it is hoped that the arrangements will be completed and the notices issued early next week. This statement will, perhaps, answer also the Question of my right hon. Friend the Member for the Hallam Division of Sheffield.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Barnsley (Earl COMPTON), I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether lie will consider the desirability of arranging that either all prisoners or long-sentence prisoners will be allowed something better than prison fare on Jubilee day?

No, Sir. Besides other object ions I cannot see my way to give special privileges to prisoners which are not and cannot be given to the population generally who are not in prison. [Much, laughter, and "Hear, hear!"]

I beg to ask the Chief Commissioner of Works whether he will be able to make arrangements on June 22 for Members to reach the House by water?

I have only just received the notice of tins Question and have no knowledge of the matter myself, but by the courtesy of Mr. Speaker's Secretary I am able to say that the Thames Steamboat Company would agree to convey Members and their friends from Chelsea or from any intermediate pier to Speaker's steps at the rate of 2s. 6d. per passenger, provided at least 250 applications are made before June 10. Applications may be made direct to the Thames Steamboat Company, 17, Philpot Lane, E.C.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the. Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that the forthcoming Jubilee Procession is to be composed in part of Military and Police contingents from every Colony and Dependency of the Crown, the Lords. Commissioners of the Admiralty will make further representations so that the sea power of the Empire may find its proper place in the Procession, either in the form of a Naval field battery with a covering party of Marines or of a rocket brigade; and whether, if none of these suggestions can be adopted and it is decided that the Royal Navy shall have no place in the Imperial Procession, the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty will order that the seamen of the Fleet shall remain at their respective ports and not be brought up to assist in keeping the streets, but that their services shall be confined to furnishing guards of honour where required?

I am, glad to say I am now in a. position to inform my hon. and gallant Friend that it has been settled that naval field guns with their crews will form part of the Jubilee Procession on the 22nd inst. [Cheers.] Contingents of Bluejackets and Marines will be brought up from the ports, not because their services are required to keep order in the streets, but because the Board of Admiralty have felt that their presence, posted as they will be in considerable detachments in conspicuous parts of the route, would be satisfactory both to the public and to the naval service. [Cheers.]

asked whether any detachments of the Royal Marine Artillery, with their guns, would also take part in the Procession?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether there would be a covering party of Marines?

It has only just been settled that naval guns are to appear; where, and in what form, will be decided afterwards. The difficulty has been that no detachments of infantry of any kind are to be in the Procession. It was to be confined to mounted troops of the line, but the concession has now been made in favour of the Navy, and that there should be field guns. Whether they are to be manned by Marines or Bluejackets are details which have not yet been settled.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Donegal (Mr. T. B. CURRAN), I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that Mr. L. MacMillan, who has spent several years in working up a coffee and dining room business at 114, Borough Road, is to be ejected, in order that his landlord may let the premises for the Procession of 22nd June; and whether, seeing that this is only one case among many others of a similar character, the Government will see their way to bring in a Bill to prevent such grave injustices?

My attention has been called to MacMillan's case. The landlord appears to have offered him certain terms on which he might be permitted to remain in possession, and when, these were declined to have taken proceedings in the High Court. The Master by whom the order for recovery was made evidently considered that there was no defence; and MacMillan did not appeal, as he might have done to the Judge. Very few cases of this kind have been brought to my notice; and though it may be there has been hardship in one or two, it would not be practicable, I am afraid, to introduce special legislation to meet them.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if, to prevent disappointment, the Volunteer corps who have been invited to send from the provinces detachments of men to London on 22nd June have been given clearly to understand that they will necessarily be massed several deep in the appointed places, in consequence of the large numbers of troops to be engaged, and will have to make their own arrangements for food and other accommodation, and that this will entail some difficulty, having regard to the probable augmentation of the London population of five millions by half as many again?

The Volunteers attending the Jubilee ceremonial will have to be messed at definite stations, as over 40,000 troops will in all be assembled in London. Arrangements are in progress to assist Volunteer corps in providing themselves with the necessary refreshments on that day. These arrangements when completed will be duly notified.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether a holiday, with pay, will be given on Jubilee Day to all persons employed in the public service, though they may not be technically "public servants," such as mechanics, labourers, and others employed at Her Majesty's prisons, and who in most cases have to take a compulsory holiday?

I must ask the hon. Member to address his Question to the Home Secretary.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he could state to the House to what extent each of the three regiments of Foot Guards is now above or below the new establishment of 1897–8; to what extent each of the three battalions of the Grenadier Guards is now above or below the new establishment of 1897–8; and how many men of the Grenadier Guards have extended their services with the colours on receipt of bounty, or rejoined the colours from the Reserve under Army Order 59, of 1897?

The new establishments of Guards about to be issued, including depots, all ranks except officers, for 1897–98, amount to 6,416, being an increase of 728 over the establishments of last year. When the 1st Battalion of Grenadier Guards embarks for Gibraltar in October, its establishment will be further increased by 177 rank and file, making in all au increased establishment of 905. Towards this 106 men have been obtained up to May 31. There remain, therefore, 799 to obtain in the course of the present financial year. The 1st Battalion Grenadiers will require 14 more men on embarkation to complete their Gibraltar establishment. The 2nd Battalion wants 81 men to complete establishment, the 3rd 72, and the Depôt and Regimental Staff 72. The Grenadier Guards, consequently, will require 239 men before April next to complete their establishment. The Coldstreams will require 276 to complete their establishment, including the proportion of the new battalions to be raised. The Scots Guards will require 284 to complete their establishment, including the proportion of the new battalions to be raised. No men have yet extended their service under the new conditions. But it should be noted that the order giving a bounty of 12 to men extending was limited to men whose service happened to expire between May 1 and October 1, and was only promulgated on May 1. The notices to Reservists (326) of the Grenadier Guards were not posted till May 25, and of these 11 have accepted up to yesterday. The increased establishments of the Guards began to take effect on April 1. In the month of May 149 Guards recruits were taken, against 78 in the preceding year, although the Army generally is considerably short of strength.

Arising out of that answer, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether men are now being taken at a very reduced standard, and whether a large number of them are taken below that reduced standard?

The standard has been reduced to 5ft. 8in. for recruits of over 20 years of age, and to 5ft. 7in. for recruits under 20. No men have been taken under the latter standard.

Am I to understand that the Grenadier Guards only require 14 men to complete their establishment?

That is so.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland (1) whether his attention has been called to the fact that out of the 20 convictions obtained in 1896 against persons engaged in illegal trawling in Scottish waters four of these convictions apply to William Sims, master of the Sunray, who was fined in the aggregate £285; two convictions apply to Frederick Powderall, master of the Pansy, who was fined in the aggregate £180; and two convictions apply to Thomas Lauder, master of the Amy Gertrude, who was fined in the aggregate £125; (2) will he state whether any of these men elected to go to prison rather than pay the fine; and (3) in view of the fact that repetition of offences by the same offender indicates an indifference to fines on the part of persons engaged in illegal trawling, will he take care that when prosecutions are undertaken the attention of the Court is prominently called to any cases of previous convictions, and that in such cases efforts be made to procure a confiscation of gear in addition to the fine?

The facts set forth in the first paragraph of the hon. Member's Question are correctly stated. Sims on three occasions and Powderall on one occasion elected to go to prison. When known, the attention of the Procurator Fiscal is called to previous convictions, and in every instance where such a course can be followed, the trawling gear belonging to convicted trawlers has been seized and sold.

I beg to ask the Lord Adcate (1) if he will state the names of the six trawling skippers, with name of vessel, who during the year 1896 elected to go to prison for the whole period of their sentence rather than pay the fines inflicted for trawling in prohibited waters; and (2) in view of the indifference with which masters of vessels engaged in trawling in prohibited waters treat the penalties now imposed, will he consider the expediency of taking such steps as will admit of deterrent penalties being inflicted on the owner of such vessels as well as on the master.

I am informed by the Fishery Board that the names of the trawling skippers who remained in prison for the whole period of their sentences in 1896, are William Price, master of the Strathspey, A 751; Isaac Jackson, master of the St. Fotin, A 392; Frederick Powderall, master of the Commodore, G.N. 31; and William Sims, master of the Sunray, A 669. As regards the second part of the Question, I must refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him to a similar Question on the 21st February last.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether the Fishery Board has yet been able to arrange with the Board of Trade the terms of the lease of the valuable and extensive mussel beds in the Clyde Estuary, off Port Glasgow; and whether, in view of the urgent demand for mussels by persons engaged in the fishing industry, care will be taken that no time is lost in prosecuting the culture of the beds?

The answer to the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that in many parts of County Down and elsewhere the landlord's agent accompanies on the same car the Sub-Commissioners to the scene of their examination of farms on which fair rents are to be fixed; and (2) whether, considering the dissatisfaction which this practice creates in the minds of the tenants, he will take steps to secure that this custom be discontinued?

I have no knowledge of the matter referred to in the first paragraph, nor have the Land Commissioners. The Assistant Commissioners are required to avoid doing anything which might suggest partiality.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that frequent applications, without effect, have been made to the Land Commission Court by the Bailieboro' Board of Guardians for confirming orders for the payment of compensation to occupiers of farms for plots taken in July 1896 for labourers cottages; and whether the said Board of Guardians have any remedy for such delay?

The Orders referred to were sealed on the 25th May last by the Land Commissioners, and sent to the Solicitor for the Sanitary Authority on the same date.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Galway (Mr. D. SHEEHY), I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a number of tenants on the Clanricarde and Daly Estates entered their eases in the Land Courts in February last; whether the Commissioners inspected the lands since; and when is it contemplated to hear and decide the cases?

At the present date there are but 26 cases from the estate of the Marquess of Clanricarde which have not been listed for hearing. The estate referred to as the "Daly Estate" cannot be identified without some further information, as there are live different landlords of the name of Daly, from whose estates in Galway applications have been received. A Sub-Commission has been engaged until recently in disposing of eases from the Portumna and Loughrea Unions, but no date has yet been fixed for the next Sub-Commission to take up cases from these districts.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture (1) whether his attention has been called to the position of Mynydd-y-Gwair Common in Glamorganshire; (2) whether he is aware that the Swansea Urban Sanitary Authority agreed to pay the sum of £100 for the extinguishment of commonable or other rights in the common in question on condition that the money should be expended for the benefit of the commoners interested; (3) whether it is a fact that, in accordance with the provisions of the Commonable Rights Compensation Act 1882, an inquiry was held in June 1896, and a decision arrived at to construct the roads across the common, but that the Board of Agriculture have declined to make an order on the ground that the committee to whom the £100 was paid refuse to reveal the amount of interest accrued on the amount; and (4) whether, in view of the inability of the commoners to take legal proceedings, he will reconsider the decision of his Department?

The reply to the first two paragraphs of the Question is in the affirmative. With regard to the third and fourth, I would say that no inquiry has been held, nor have we as yet declined to make an Order in the matter. A meeting of the persons interested in the money in question was convened in June last, but the validity Of the resolutions then arrived at is contested, and we are now considering what further steps, if any, it is possible for us to take.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the great inconvenience and loss to the fishing industry at Baltimore for want of a pier at deep water and the corresponding extension of the railway so that fish could be transhipped from the fishing boats to the railway waggons; and that some shippers of fish prefer to send their cargoes to Liverpool by sea to the cost and inconvenience of getting them to the railway under present conditions; whether the original intention was to run the railway line to a deep water pier; and whether the Government will now provide the necessary money to have this work carried out?

The extension of the railway to deep water was not included in the scheme submitted by the promoting company, or contemplated in the Statutory Report thereon by the Board of Works. The railway terminates in accordance with the original scheme of the promoters. I have no information that some shippers of fish prefer to send their cargoes to Liverpool by sea, direct, as stated; and with regard to the construction of a deep water pier, whilst it is generally admitted that such a work would prove a stimulus to the fishing industry, I can only repeat what I have already stated, that until the Harbour Board and the railway company come to an understanding with the Congested Districts Board, the question of a contribution by means of a grant in aid cannot be again considered.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that there is great need for a telegraph office at Kilmaganny, county Kilkenny, which has a population of about 400, several important business establishments, Petty Sessions Court, Catholic and Protestant churches, dispensary, and constabulary barracks, and is situate in an important district with no telegraph office nearer than four miles distant; and whether he will take steps to establish a telegraph office at Kilmaganny?

The question of extending the telegraphs to Kilmaganny has been carefully inquired into, but the Postmaster General regrets that he is not in a position to establish a telegraph office there unless a guarantee be furnished. The Postmaster General will communicate with the hon. Member on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if there is any foundation for the statement that in the postal service at Nottingham lads from 14 to 16 years of age are employed between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m., six days a week, for a weekly wage of 3s. or at the rate of 2d. per hour?

The statement is not accurate. Six telegraph messengers over 16 years of age who arc engaged between three and four hours a day on their usual duties are employed from 7 p.m. to 9.30 p.m. to assist in, the last town delivery of letters. They earn on an average 7s. 6d. a week, and they are awaiting appointment as town postmen. The arrangement under which they take part in the delivery of letters is of advantage to the lads, as it puts them in training for the appointments to which they are looking forward.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if it is the case that, whilst master gunners in the Artillery, conductors in the Army Ordnance Corps, and staff sergeant-majors of the Army Service Corps may rise, after certain periods of satisfactory service, from the lowest to the highest grade of warrant officer, an Army schoolmaster must remain in the lowest or fourth class of warrant officers so long as he is a schoolmaster; and, if so, does he propose to maintain this disability?

The classes into which warrant officers are divided must depend on the relative importance of the duties and responsibilities of the appointments held. However valuable may be the services of an Army schoolmaster, it is not possible to regard his functions as equal in importance to those of the warrant officers cited in the Question, who have either high executive duties or important charges of materiel. Schoolmasters are eligible for and often obtain commissioned rank as Inspectors of Schools.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether, in view of the statment contained in the Fifteenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland, that the practice of concealing or obliterating letters and numbers, and trawling without lights, has become very common with trawlers engaged in fishing in prescribed waters, and causes great difficulty in identifying trawlers so engaged, he will consider the expediency of taking such steps as will admit of the penalties for the concealment of numbers and fishing without lights being rendered of a more severe and deterrent nature than now imposed?

I am informed by the Fishery Board that the penalty for concealing letters and numbers is fixed by the Additional Regulations under Part 2 of the Sea Fisheries Act, 1868 (31 and 32 Victoria, chap, 45), which Regulations were approved by Her Majesty in Council on 26th February, 1880. The regulations in regard to lights are issued under the Acts relating to Merchant Shipping. But I must point out that these are matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Board of Trade.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, having regard to the statement in the Fifteenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland, that in the year 1896 there were four cases in which the gear of persons engaged in illegal trawling was confiscated, will he state in each case the name of the trawler so engaged, as well as the name of the master and owner, and whether a fine was imposed in each case?

I am informed by the Fishery Board that the names of the trawlers whose gear was confiscated in 1896 were the Sunray, A. 669, owners Johnstone and Sherritt, Aberdeen, master, William Sims; Bosphorus, S.S.S. 278, owner J. Wilson, North Shields, master Joseph Ballard; and Commodore, G.N. 31, owner John McPherson, Arbroath, master Frederick Powderall. The gear of the last named trawler was seized on two occasions. In each of the cases referred to fines were imposed.

I beg to ask the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to a verdict of manslaughter given in the case of a bicyclist who was killed at Stockport by a cart driven at night without lights; and whether he will be prepared to introduce a Bill to enforce the carrying of lights, and prevent similar accidents in the future?

My attention has not been called to this case otherwise than by the hon. Member's Question. I am afraid I cannot undertake to introduce a Bill as suggested by him; but a Bill dealing with the subject is already before the House and has obtained a Second Reading, and under the existing law Borough and County Councils have ample powers of dealing with the matter by means of bye-laws, powers which in many cases have been exercised.

asked whether it was not the fact that there was no lights bye-law at Stockport, although one existed where the accident occurred, and whether the right hon. Gentleman would not take some measures to enforce uniformity in the carrying of lights?

said that had the cart at Stockport carried a light it was very probable the accident would not have happened. He understood his hon. Friend desired general legislation on the subject. The hon. Gentleman's own Bill had been read a Second time and he must leave the House to deal with it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he could state how many, if any, prisoners in the Military prisons of the United Kingdom or Colonies have received corporal punishment on more than one occasion during the last six years?

The Returns rendered do not distinguish the cases in which corporal punishment has been inflicted more than once on the same prisoner, but the information can be called for from the several prisons if the hon. Member desires it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he could state how many prisoners in the local prisons and convict establishments of the United Kingdom have received corporal punishment on more than one occasion during the past six years; and if there are any who have received such punishment on more than two occasions during the same period?

The Governors of prisons have been requested to supply this information, but it will be impossible to answer the Question before the holidays.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education if his attention has been called to the serious complaints, made by parents before the stipendiary magistrate at Worship Street last Saturday, of children attending St. Columba's Church Schools, Kingsland Road, being obliged to go in procession to church, bow at the altar, etc., contrary to the wishes of the parents, and the allegation in one instance that the children were caned if they did not go; and, if so, if he will take steps to insure the due observance of the conscience clause in the school?

The attention of the Committee of Council was drawn to this matter about a month ago, and they have satisfied themselves by very careful inquiry that no child is obliged to attend the church, or is punished for not doing so. The managers have, however, been instructed to enter on the Time Table the day and hour of the services to which they propose to take children.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the telegraph service in Scotland at the country post offices on the 22nd June will, as on Sundays, be limited to one hour, so that the telegraphists may not be detained the whole day in their respective offices?

Having the whole of the United Kingdom in view, I stated on the 13th ultimo, in answer to a Question of the hon. Member for Devonport, that the arrangements would be the same throughout the United Kingdom as on ordinary Bank Holidays, and the telegraph offices would, as a rule, be kept open as on ordinary days to meet the convenience of the public, but that the less important offices in towns would be closed as far as possible. The Postmaster General does not think he can make any exception in the case of Scotland.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether grants payable under the Voluntary Schools Act 1897, may be used for building purposes?

No·, Sir.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that imported barley meal used as food for cattle often contains a large quantity of maize meal, a much cheaper article; and whether he has considered if anything can be done to prevent the purchaser being thus prejudiced?

No complaint has hitherto reached me as to the adulteration of barley meal in the manner indicated, but I should presume that a purchaser would have no difficulty in obtaining redress by means of civil proceedings for any loss which he might sustain. Without more precise information before me, I am afraid that I am unable to assist my hon. Friend, but I should be glad to receive and to consider any statement of the facts with which he may be able to supply me.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the results, so far, of the inquiries which have been made of local authorities in reference to the recommendations contained in the Report upon the Weights and Measures Acts which was submitted last year; and whether, having regard to those results and to the fact that a deputation from the County Councils Association and the Association of Municipal Corporations waited upon him, urging the desirability of securing uniformity of administration, he will consent to appoint a Departmental Committee of the Board of Trade to consider the subject?

Since I replied to a Question by the hon. and learned Member on the 19th February, only ten more replies have been received from local authorities. Some of the larger and more important of these bodies have not responded at present, and I am not yet in a position to decide upon future action.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he has received and perused the statement of the officers of the disbanded 5th Volunteer Battalion Scottish Rifles (Airdrie Volunteers); and if he will recommend an inquiry into the whole facts of the case?

The statement forwarded by my hon. Friend has been duly received at the War Office. The decision to disband the 5th Volunteer Battalion Scottish Rifles was made after careful consideration by the military authorities of the condition of the battalion, and the Secretary of State is satisfied that no good end would be attained by reopening the question.

said be would he take another opportunity of exposing this business.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the usual Memorandum explanatory of the Indian Financial Statement, which has already been received from Calcutta, can he presented to Parliament immediately after the Recess, so that Members may be better prepared to deal with that statement when brought before tire House for its adoption?

The explanatory Memorandum is in the hands of the printers; but some of the information which I wish to include in it was only received by the last mail from India, and I fear that it cannot be distributed to Members for some time yet.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that a site for a new post office at Weston-super-Mare was acquired by Government several years ago, that new accommodation is urgently required, and when the building is likely to be commenced?

A site for a new post office at Weston-super-Mare was purchased in 1892, and the building plans are still under consideration. It has been necessary to revise them more than once, as the expense involved was considered to be too great. The Postmaster General regrets that he is not in a position to say when the building will be commenced; but the present office was temporarily enlarged last year, so as to mitigate the need for the new accommodation.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether an appeal has been lodged against the recent decision of the Vice Chancellor in the Giants' Causeway case; and whether in view of the difficulty on the part of the defendants of raising further funds for the defence of public rights, he will advise the Treasury to provide the money required.

I have been informed that an appeal is contemplated, but I am not aware whether it has been lodged. There is no precedent for the Treasury paying the costs of the private defendants in such a case as this.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the Reports of the Admirals on Cretan affairs dealing with the period from 12th February to 4th May have been published, while the Papers relating to the previous period, from 5th December to 12th February, including those relating to the burning of Canea, and the instructions to the Admirals, are still held back.

The hon. Member will see on reference to the Cretan Blue-book (Turkey, No. 8, 1897) that it contains papers, not, as he says, only till December 5, but down to the end of the year, the last Dispatch published in it having been received on December 28. I explained to the hon. Member on Monday that the Papers from that date onward are in course of preparation, and will shortly be in the hands of the House. But, as the Blue-book is a large one, and as we are anxious to bring it up to the latest possible date, it was decided to lay the reports of the Admiral in the interval.

asked whether the next batch of papers published would include a report as to the number of Mussulmans, including women and children, who had been murdered by the Cretan insurgents during the present year.

said the Government had received no such Report.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in reference to the raid made by armed Mussulmans on the village of Ghalifa, resulting in the slaughter of several Christians, including women, whether the Governor of Candia has furnished any explanation to the representatives of the Great Powers concerning the alleged connivance of the outposts, who had been specially instructed to prevent such movements; and what steps are being taken to prevent a recurrence of these raids from a town in possession of the Great Powers?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Governor of Candia, in consequence of the protests of the Consuls, caused the leaders of the Mahommedan expedition which had plundered the Christian village of Kalivia to be arrested; whether on Monday morning a. large crowd of Mahommedans surrounded the Konak demanding the release of the prisoners; and whether the prisoners have been released?

The only official information that we have received, beyond that which was given in my reply on the 1st inst., is contained in a telegram from Sir A. Biliotti, which arrived this afternoon to the effect that on June 1 upwards of 1,000 Mussulmans made a pacific demonstration at Candia to obtain the liberation of their co-religionists who were suspected of having attacked the Ghalifa Christians; that the crowd was dispersed by the gendarmerie and troops; but that the prisoners were released.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs who is responsible at present for the maintenance of law and order in the town of Candia?

The Turkish Governor is responsible for the maintenance of order in the town of Candia. But it must be considered that he is under the direction of the Admirals who represent the Powers, and have control of the European occupying force.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the detailed Report on the expenditure of the grant in aid to Egypt will be circulated?

The details of the expenditure of the grant in aid to Egypt in respect of the Dongola Expedition have already been circulated. They appear on Page 2 of Lord Cromer's Report on Egypt, which was presented in February. I expect a further Report in due course, with respect to the remainder of the grant.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the salaries paid to Second Division clerks are for a daily attendance of seven hours; and whether it is the practice of the Treasury to sanction the payment of additional remuneration when these officers are required to work periodic overtime?

The answer to both Questions is "Yes."

asked what was the scale of remuneration for overtime?

thought it was 1s. 6d. per hour.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that one Patrick Connerly, or Connolly, a convict in Maryborough Prison, undergoing a long sentence for manslaughter, was returned for trial in April I882; that, through remands and adjournments, the trial did not take place until July 1883; and that, of the two other prisoners who were tried with Connolly on the same charge, one of them, named Fon, died a lunatic in Richmond Asylum some years ago, and the other, named Diskin, was discharged last year on the plea of ill-health and died shortly afterwards; and (2) whether, in view of all these facts, he will recommend that the convict Connelly shall be allowed in the working out of his sentence the benefit of the 15 months' imprisonment which lie underwent while awaiting trial, and the sentence be reduced accordingly?

Patrick Conneely is the name of the convict referred to. Fox died in Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum in July 1889. I have no information that Diskin died shortly after his release on licence in 1895. Otherwise the statements in the first paragraph are correct. An application was recently received from Conneely to be allowed the benefit of the period during which he awaited his trial, and it was decided that there was no ground for a special remission of sentence in his case.

May I ask whether it is the custom in this country to make allowance in the working out of a sentence for the time the prisoner is kept awaiting his trial?

I presume all the circumstances were before the Judge.

I beg, to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will lay upon the Table the calculations on which he relied to show that the proportion of compensation to be paid in the coal trade under the Workmen (Compensation for Accidents) Bill would certainly not exceed I per cent. of the wages paid?

Sir, the calculations I gave were Departmental and private calculations based on official and other figures which are as much open to hon. Members as myself, and I do not propose to lay them on the Table.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would invite the representatives of the coal trade in South Wales to meet him and discuss the question, so that they might see how the Bill bore upon them?

said he was afraid that would involve tremendous discussion. He was quite willing to hear what those gentlemen had to say, but he might state that he had studied with the greatest care the statistics which had been laid before him, and to promise to discuss the whole matter was more than he could undertake.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether it was the practice of the Inland Revenue Department, previous to the passing of the Finance Act 1894, to charge probate duty on personal property falling to the Crown by default of next of kin; (2) whether it is now the practice to charge estate duty on both real and personal property which falls to the Crown by default either of heirs or of next of kin; (3) whether there is any instance of departure from this practice in the case either of probate duty or of estate duty; and (4) whether any question has arisen; and, if so, how, as to the lawfulness of the practice?

So far as England is concerned, the answer to the first two Questions is in the affirmative, and I am not aware of any instance in which probate duty has not been paid on personal property falling to the Crown by default of next of kin. A question arose after the passing, of the Act of 1894 as to the legality of charging estate duty in these cases, especially upon real estate, which upon a reference to the Law Officers was decided by them in the affirmative a few months ago. Accordingly, estate duty has been, or will be, paid in all cases in which property, real or personal, has fallen or may fall to the Crown in England. In Scotland the practice has been somewhat different, as the Crown can there collect an estate without administration, and so did not before 1894 pay probate duty (which was payable upon the grant of letters of administration or confirmation). The case was, however, altered by the Act of 1894 (as interpreted by the Law Officers), which made estate duty payable irrespective of letters of administration or confirmation, and since the end of last year the practice in Scotch cases has been assimilated to that in English.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention, has been directed to a case tried at Grace's Old Castle (Kilkenny) Petty Sessions, before Mr. Considine, R.M., on the 22nd ult., in which it was proved that a water bailiff, named Bannon, had forcibly seized, assaulted with a cane sword, and searched the pockets of a boy named Patrick Comerford, and took from him some minnow alleging that they were salmon fry; whether water bailiffs are legally empowered to arrest and search the pockets of persons whom they know and could identify and prosecute if necessary; and whether the Crown can and will interfere either to prosecute Bannon or order a re-hearing of the charges?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to a case tried in Kilkenny Petty Sessions on the 22nd ultimo, in which it was proved that a water bailiff named Joseph Bannon, in the employ of the Irish Fishery Conservators, forcibly took from a boy named Patrick Comerford, whom he found fishing, some minnow which Bannon alleged was salmon fry; whether he is aware that it was sworn by Bannon that the Conservators only decided a few days before this trial that minnow is not salmon fry; and whether the Irish Fishery Conservators intend to retain Bannon in their employment?

In answer to this and the next Question on the Paper, I beg to say that my attention has been called to the case mentioned, in which there was a direct conflict of testimony between the parties as to the circumstances and nature of the assaults alleged to have been committed by each of the parties on the other. The magistrates dismissed both cases, holding that in point of law the Statute 54 and 55 Vic., s. 20, sec. 6 did not authorise the water bailiff to search the person of Comerford, who is a man of 24 years of age. It is open to both parties to appeal from these decisions, when the magistrates ruling can be revised. It also appears from the report furnished to me that Comerford threatens to take civil proceedings against Bannon for the assault. Under these circumstances it would not be proper for me to give an opinion on the legal point involved. The Crown have no power to order a rehearing of the charges made on both sides, and it does not appear to be a fit case in which to institute a criminal prosecution at the suit of the Crown.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is now in a position to fix a. date for the introduction of the Bill placing parish councils in Scotland on the same footing as similar councils in England in regard to guarantees?

I hope to introduce the Bill immediately after Whitsuntide.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General (1), whether he is aware that for many years past merchants and traders in Covent Garden Market were in the habit of sending to the country to their customers who were producers, packets of printed labels for clearly directing their agricultural produce, which were sent under the book post rate, no objection being raised by the postal authorities until two months ago; (2) will he explain why, without warning, the postal authorities have stopped these packages, altogether, under the book post rate, and will only admit them under the letter rate, so that what formerly was sent for ½d. now costs 1½d.; and (3) whether, considering the burthened condition of the farmers and fruit growers, he will revert to the old rule, and allow these labels, which are absolutely valueless, to go at book post rate?

The answer to the first paragraph of the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative. The packets were excluded from transmission by book post under the Inland Post Amendment Warrant, 1897, which pro- vides that the expression "book packet" shell not include any article which, though made of paper and bearing words in writing or printing, is substantially of the nature of stationery or merchandise. The Warrant was laid on the Table of the House on the 29th of January last, and notice of its publication was given in the Gazette of the 15th of the same month. The Postmaster General considers that the grievance will be removed by the regulations which come into force on the 22nd instant, as, though it will still be impossible to send a 2 oz. packet by book post for ½d., it will be possible to send a 4 oz. packet for by letter post.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Galway (Mr. SHEEHY), I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) on what grounds was Sergeant O'Dowd compelled to retire from the police force on a reduced pension before his time; and (2) will he state by whose authority Inspector Fleming is drawing an allowance of £50 per annum as Divisional County Inspector one year longer than the maximum period of three years?

No pensioner named Sergeant O'Dowd is on the lists of pensioners from the Royal Irish Constabulary or Dublin Metropolitan Police. There is no time limit, as suggested, to the payment of the annual allowance referred to in the second paragraph.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Foreign Office has yet received information respecting the letter addressed by Sir Philip Currie to Tewfik Pasha in regard to the recent massacre of Armenians at Tokat; whether complaint was made as to the inactivity of the tribunal at Tokat appointed to try the Mussulmans implicated in the massacre; and what steps have been taken by the representatives of the Powers to secure the punishment of those already tried and found guilty of complicity in the affair?

Her Majesty's Ambassador telegraphs that he is addressing representations to the Turkish Government daily with regard to the non-confirmation of the sentences passed by the Commission on the offenders at Tokat and the acquittal of the officials, and that his colleagues, whom he has acquainted with the telegrams received from Her Majesty's Consul, have also made representations to the Porte. The Council of Ministers have had the matter under their consideration, but so far no decision has been arrived at.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman could tell the House what the sentences were?

I cannot without reference, because there were a great many sentences, each differing from the other. If my hon. Friend desires the information I shall be glad to give it to him.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state why the Inspector of Mines for South Wales has discontinued giving in his annual Reports the number of inspections made (above and under ground) and inquests attended during the course of the year by himself and his assistant inspectors; and if he is aware that this information was of interest to those engaged in colliery operations in the district?

I do not know why Mr. Robson has omitted this information from his last, Report. He is under no obligation to give it, but I have no doubt he will be willing to do so if it is of interest to those in his district.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that, although there are two places named Tarbert in Scotland, it is equally true that there are two places named Newport in England; and that, in the case of these latter places, they are respectively and correctly described in the list of money order and telegraph offices in the Post Office Guide as Newport (Mon.) and Newport (Isle of Wight); and whether, seeing that Tarbert (Harris) is the name of a money order and telegraph office, will he explain why it cannot be so described at page 205 of the Post Office Guide, especially having regard to the fact that, in describing Harris as a money order and telegraph office at page 121, the Post Office is misleading the public, Harris being merely the name of a district?

Yes, Sir; the Postmaster General is aware, and lie thinks the hon. Member's wishes can be met in the next edition of the Post Office Guide. The office at Tarbert (Harris) shall there he fully described as a. money order and telegraph office both under the name Harris and under the name Tarbert.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether the rules of procedure under the Judicial Trustees Act 1896, have been finally approved; and, in such case, if he will take steps to bring to the notice of the legal profession and the public the opportunity given by the Act for any person interested in a trust, either as settlor, trustee, or beneficiary, to obtain the appointment of a judicial trustee, who at trifling cost will discharge his duties under the supervision of the Court?

I am informed that the rules under the Judicial Trustees Act are almost ready for issue. The object has been, as far as possible, to establish a system which shall not be costly, but it is difficult to utilise the supervision of the Court without expense.

I beg to ask the Attorney General whether the British Administrator on the mainland strip of the British East African Protectorate acts legally when he, in accordance with the discretionary powers recently given him by Her Majesty's Government, restores to their previous masters slaves who have run away to these British administered dominions?

The statement of facts in the hon. Member's Question is not sufficient to enable me to express an opinion, but if he will communicate with me I will go into the matter.

On behalf of the lion. Member for Dublin University (Mr. EDWARD CARSON), I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury how many Judgeships are now vacant in Ireland; and whether the Government intend to bring in a Bill this Session dealing with all or any of such vacancies?

In answer to my hon. Friend, I have to say that there are now three Judgeships vacant in Ireland, and it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill shortly after Whitsuntide dealing with the matter.

asked what was to become of the money which had been saved by reason of the vacancies?

In accordance with a pledge given earlier in the Session by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, any money which has been saved through the vacant Irish. Judgeships will be devoted to Irish purposes.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Exeter (Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE), I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if, considering the increased amount of work that has devolved of late years upon the Board of Trade Department, Her Majesty's Government will take into consideration the advisability of assimilating the position of the Minister at the head of that Department with that of one of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State?

was understood to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, instead of confining himself strictly to the terms of the Question, he would also consider the alternative plan of rearranging the work of the Departments?

The Government recognise that the progress of legislation has made a change both in the absolute and ill the relative amount of work done by the different offices, and possibly, also, in the importance of the work done by them. We feel, however, that it would be impossible to consider one office in isolation to the other offices, and that, probably, when the question comes to be considered, the point raised by the right hen. Baronet opposite ought not to be lost sight of. But while we admit all these facts, we do not think that the question is at present ripe for any exhaustive inquiry or for any great changes.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that the expenses incurred by railway and other companies in Wales and Monmouthshire (exclusive of English railway companies running into Wales) in promoting and opposing private Bills and Provisional Orders before Parliament during the years 1886 to 1891 exceeded those incurred in connection with Bills from Ireland, and that, according to a statement recently made by the Home Secretary, there is no reason for supposing that there has been any material change in the circumstances since the last Return was granted, lie will consider the advisability of extending to Bills coming from Wales the provisions of the Measure promised in the Queen's Speech for amending the existing procedure with respect to private Bills coming from Scotland and Ireland?

I am not at all prepared to say that the present system of legislation for England and Wales is entirely satisfactory, but I do not think that is a cause why any part of England or Wales should be dealt with separately.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the increase in the production and export of British coal in recent years, the limited extent of the coalfields, and the dependence of our industrial supremacy upon an adequate supply of suitable fuel, and having regard to the fact that no official inquiry as to the probable continuance of our coal supplies has been made for nearly a quarter of a century, he will consider the advisability of appointing a Select Committee of the House to report upon the matter?

I have not had an opportunity of consulting the Home Office upon the subject, but I cannot help feeling some personal doubts as to the value of such an investigation unless the hon. Gentle. man thinks that any subsequent action could be taken if the investigation showed that our coalfields were practically becoming exhausted; and that makes me feel doubtful as to the necessity or even the propriety of such an investigation.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can state what Supply will be taken on Thursday the 17th instant?

The Supply we propose to take on Thursday the 17th, the day on which we reassemble after the holidays, is Class 4.

And on the Friday?

Classes 6 and 7.

Does Class 4 include the Education Vote?

Yes, Sir. In reply to an HON. MEMBER who asked when the Post Office Vote would be taken,

I cannot give a pledge. It will not be taken on the Thursday or the Friday after we meet. Very likely it will be taken on the Friday following, but I cannot tell.

said it would be inexcusable, in view of the work that remained to be done on the Workmen (Compensation for Accidents) Bill, if a friend of that Bill were to cause any long delay on the Motion before the House. The Foreign Office Vote had been postponed for the purpose of affording an opportunity for a general discussion upon the foreign policy of the Government on pending questions, such as affairs in the farther East in connection with China and Korea, while there were other foreign matters of importance, such as the treatment of slaves in the East Africa Protectorate, which could be dealt with on the Diplomatic and Consular Vote. But there were two questions as to which there would be a feeling in the country that an opportunity which would not offer again for a couple of weeks ought to be taken advantage of to elicit some information from the Government with regard to Turkey and Greece. With regard to Greece he would not attempt to press the Government, seeing that delicate negotiations were still in h progress, although of course he should be glad the Government could give the House any information. But it appeared to him that nothing could remove the impression under which many Members of the House rested, namely, that a terrible condition of affairs prevailed in Crete for which the policy of the Powers was in a large degree responsible. When the blockade of Crete became effective, on March 21, the policy of the Government was autonomy for Crete—autonomy of a very complete description—and the immediate removal of the Greek and Turkish forces. The whole of the Greek troops had left Crete now some time, but not a single Turkish soldier had been withdrawn from the island, and while the Powers had landed troops in considerable numbers, and while the British Power was represented by large forces, yet the Admirals appeared to be unable to maintain order, even in the town actually garrisoned by our troops. A question was put just now by the hon. Member for East Mayo, who had made a careful study of the Cretan question, and questions were put by him on the previous day, and from the answers given it appeared that disorder prevailed actually in Canea itself, and that prisoners—the persons who were supposed to have been implicated in the attack by the Mahomedans upon a Greek village, in which a number of people were killed a few days ago—these prisoners were released by the mob under the very eyes of our troops. He confessed that the Blue-book laid before the House appeared to have been selected in a very curious fashion. The Dispatches seemed to have been taken out here and there, a portion only of the story being told, and here and there with references to papers of the same date which were not disclosed. Certainly the effect was to create an unjust prejudice, in his opinion, against one side in this particular dispute. The Admirals were no doubt very excellent Admirals, from the naval point of view, but as far as he could judge of their conduct from the Blue-book, they had not displayed great diplomatic powers or great powers of governing in connection with the settlement of the solution of the immediate Cretan question. Admirals, the most distinguished, had not always been successful in diplomacy. Nelson tried to affect the policy of the Two Sicilies, but he made no great display in the art of government. Certainly the Admirals in relation to the affairs of Crete seemed to be in face of a worse state of things at the present moment than they were three months ago. The Government were very deeply committed to the establishment in Crete of a very complete form of autonomy; they were absolutely committed to the withdrawal of every Turkish soldier from the island; but they saw no progress whatever being made towards the solution of this question. Things in Crete were going from bad to worse. Even on the evidence of the Blue-book and of our Admiral himself, the steps we were now taking were making things worse, because he showed in the Blue Book that every day that passed made it more and more difficult for the island to settle down, and to be brought under capable, prosperous, and contented government. No doubt the Government had told the House that their excuse for letting things slide along in Crete as they were going on now, was that the question of the Greek frontier must be settled, the Treaty of Peace between Turkey and Greece signed, and the question of the indemnity regulated before the Cretan question could be settled. He was afraid from what he had seen in the past of this Cretan question, especially from what they had seen in the past few months, that this was merely a policy of postponement. ["Hear, hear!"] So long as they went on trying to govern Crete by a council of war composed of six Admirals, things would continue to go from bad to worse in that island. Nothing but the choice of a skilful administrator and diplomatist to act as the commissary of the different Powers was likely to lead to the cessation of the present state of things, which, in his belief, was a disgrace to Europe. ["Hear, hear!"]

desired to call attention to the recent sortie from the town of Candia. It might appear to some people that these quarrels and bloody encounters, on a small scale, between the Mahomedan and Christian population of Crete, were small matters, but they were not small in their possible consequences, as they would realise when they remembered that this sortie of Candia was an occurrence exactly analogous to those which in the months of January and February last preceded the burning of Canea, and led up to the subsequent bombardment, blockade and war of Thessaly. Therefore, small as the matters were, it must be recognised that they might lead to the most regrettable consequences. So long as the Greek troops were retained in Crete, every request that was made to the Government to hurry up their operations in Crete, to declare the details of their policy of autonomy and go forward with the work of restoring peace in that island, was met with the one answer, that the occupation by the Greek troops was the only obstacle. Over and over again pledges were made from the Treasury Bench that the moment the Greek troops were withdrawn peace would be restored to the island, and the work of free government taken in hand. The last of the Greek troops left Crete on the 23rd May; it was now the 3rd June, but instead of any step being taken in the direction of giving peace and freedom to Crete they saw that fatal course of operations being indulged in which on so many previous occasions had been deliberately commenced by the Mahomedan population, with the view of involving the whole island in anarchy and confu- sion. This particular sortie was the first blow struck since the Greek troops left the island, and the Christian population would have reason, therefore, to doubt the promises which had been made to them by the Powers in the presence of whose very troops such an occurrence was allowed to take place, although they were there presumably for the express purpose of seeing that law and order were maintained. The Candia correspondent of The Times stated on the 26th that a sortie was about to take place, but the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs on being questioned on Friday the 27th of May stated that the Foreign Office had no information about the sortie. Two days after being so questioned, the sortie took place, the right hon. Gentleman stating, that it had been secretly organised, and carried out without the slightest suspicion of such intention on the part of the Mahomedans or the Governor of the place. But it was clear, as was shown by the intimation given by The Times correspondent, that the contemplated sortie must have been a matter of common knowledge. What action did the Powers propose to take to secure the punishment of the men who had engaged in the sortie and in the outrages incident to it? He was rather surprised at an answer given by the Under Secretary to the question who was responsible for order and law in Candia. The right hon. Gentleman replied that the Turkish Governor was so responsible. All he had to say was that it was a bad look out for law and order. That was another way of saying that no man's life or property was safe. It was impossible for any one of the six Powers to wash their hands of responsibility for the acts of ruthlessness and violence, conducted under the very shadow of their flags. It was idle for them to disclaim the responsibility which the fact of the occupation of the island cast upon them.

I was not disclaiming it. I especially acknowledged it. Whilst I said in the first paragraph of my answer that the Turkish Governor was responsible for the maintenance of law and order in the town, I went on to say it must be considered that he is under the direction of the Admirals who represent the Powers and have control of the European occupying troops.

hoped instructions would be sent to the Admirals to show the same alacrity in restoring order and seeing justice carried out that they displayed in shelling the insurgents on another occasion around Candia. It was said that after the Greek troops had left the island the blockade would cease. The troops had left, and yet the blockade continued. There was no blockade against the Mahomedan inhabitants, but against the Christians, without distinction of person or sex. Why, now the Greek troops had left, was the blockade maintained? He was convinced that, if at the beginning, the Cretan population had been treated with a little consideration and kindness, the bombardments which had shocked the moral sentiment of the country, and the war in Thessaly would never have taken place. If the Cretans had not been treated as rebels and enemies, but with common sense and sympathy, showing that this country meant to do them justice and to rescue them from the position in which they were placed, a peaceful arrangement might have been brought about. He bad asked why the Admirals' Dispatches had been published, while previous and far more interesting and valuable papers had been kept back. A sentence in the Dispatch of Rear-Admiral Harris of March 4th showed that, however estimable he might be, he was utterly unfit to deal with the insurgent population. Before he had had any opportunity of making himself acquainted with the character of the Cretan people, he wrote speaking of them as a savage race who only understood force. No wonder he soon began to use force, and concluded that force was the only remedy. But history showed that the Cretans had had nothing but force for three centuries. It was just another sample of what was admitted by all nations to be characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon race—the utter incapacity to understand suffering races such as the Cretans. In connection with the Jubilee celebrations, it was his intention to put a question to the Government as to whether they proposed to follow the example of all civilised nations by taking the occasion of the great national thanksgiving to extend a measure of amnesty to the political prisoners now lying in gaol in this country and in Ireland. The Government had been questioned over and over again on that subject, and the stereotyped answer was that they had nothing more to say in addition to what had been said by the Home Secretary. It was impossible to deny that it was the custom of civilised nations on occasions of national rejoicing to signalise them by the remission of sentences. On the occasion of the Coronation of the late Czar, upwards of 1,000 prisoners were released. The Jubilee celebration was undoubtedly an occasion of great national rejoicing to Great Britain and the Empire, but it was an occasion in which the Irish people could not join. Even if the Government should be so well advised as to release those prisoners—about a dozen in number—he (Mr. Dillon) could not pretend that that would cause the Irish people to join in the Jubilee celebrations, but it would have a considerable effect in lessening the bitterness that existed in Ireland in reference to this matter. [Cheers.] A few weeks ago a strange interview took place between Mr. Greene, England's representative in Pretoria, and the President of the Republic. Mr. Greene called upon President Kruger and asked him to release the Johannesburg prisoners still in gaol. President Kruger replied that they could get out by signing some papers which had already been signed by other prisoners released. The prisoners said they could not see their way to sign the papers, and Mr. Greene pointed out to Mr. Kruger that it was the custom of most civilised countries that when the circumstances in connection with which criminals had been sentenced had passed away, the sentences were reconsidered. "Am I to look upon your country as uncivilised?" said Mr. Greene. Mr. Kruger, in reply, said:—

"You have in Ireland still in your gaols, I am informed, Irish political prisoners who have lain there for 12 or 13 or 14 years, and yet your Government refuses to consider their sentences. Am I to conclude that your country is uncivilised?"

He was informed that Mr. Greene thereupon withdrew, and pursued the subject no further. There really was no answer to that. It was said that England was one of the most liberty-loving countries in the world, and the Government professed to administer their laws with humanity, and yet no civilised nation had under similar circumstances of rejoicing refusesl to open the prison doors to those unfortunate political prisoners. He did believe that if these political prisoners were released, it would create a profound effect upon public sentiment in Ireland. The proposition had been laid down recently that these prisoner, should not be dealt with except on considerations of health. He had heard more than one Chief Secretary repudiate, as he would a most scandalous charge, the suggestion that political considerations should influence him in regard to these prisoners, and up to the present time no Irish political prisoners had been amnestied; they had only been released when the condition of their health was such that any prisoner would have been released under similar circumstances. He directed the attention of the house to the Debate which took place in that House in 1877, when Mr. J. O'Connor Power moved a Resolution in favour of amnesty. Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Gathorne Hardy, and Lord Harrington spoke on that occasion, and Lord Hartington then said that supposing these men were to be treated as political prisoners, if on general grounds Her Majesty's advisers, acting upon their own responsibility, came to the conclusion that the political advantages which would accompany a general amnesty of these political offenders would be such as to outweigh any disadvantages which might arise from, their release, he believed that such a decision would be received with the greatest possible satisfaction on his side el the House. That opinion was also endorsed by Mr. Gathorne Hardy. The principle had been laid down and accepted on both sides of the House that these questions of dealing with politic prisoners should be looked at from the point of view of political expediency, end if the Government would not accept that view, they would be going back to an earlier and more illiberal policy. It was open to the Government to consider whether the effect on Ireland of releasing these prisoners would not be well worth any disadvantages which might occur, and whether it would not be a good stroke of policy. He did not believe for a single moment that even if all these men were released, the Irish people could take an active part in the Jubilee celebration, but he was deeply convinced that if the political prisoners were released as a part of the Jubilee proceedings, it would create a profound effect on public sentiment in Ireland, and would lead to great political advantages.

I will not discuss how far it was tiling for the hon. Gentleman to say that his party proposes to take no part in the Jubilee celebration, or whether he made that the foundation of the appeal winch he has addressed to the House. ["Hear, hear!"] But in any case I will at once say that we are really absolved from following the line of his argument from the fact that we differ from him fundamentally as to the premisses on which that argument was base,. He has quoted a conversation which I personally had not heard of before, which is alleged to have taken place between President Kruger and Mr. Greene. Mr. Kruger, according to the hon. Gentleman, has been under the impression that we were keeping in prison in this country prisoners who, in ordinary parlance, would be described as political prisoners. Now, the hon. Gentleman knows that that is not our opinion. I think I should probably be not far wrong when I say that if President Kruger knew the facts, he would not deny that we were right, neither would he be disposed to release, nor would any Englishman propose that he should release any individuals who, in the furtherance of their designs, used dynamite of attempted to use dynamite—["hear, hear!"]—and endeavoured to further their designs by means abhorrent to every moral and every civilised man. Sir, that is the real answer to the hon. Gentleman. If the persons with whom we were concerned were of the class of the Fenian conspirators, who, I imagine, were in question in the Debate to which he referred, I could understand the relevance of his speech, whether I should agree with his opinions or not; but I deny that the speech is relevant at all at the present time. The persons for whom he is pleading, in our view, and in the view of the majority on both sides of the House, are not to be classed among political prisoners, and it is a view which we have so often expressed in the House before that I do not propose to discuss it now.

The Home Secretary stated that he accepted that classification.

No, what the Home Secretary said was that these prisoners had a political object in the crime which they sought to commit, and that was true, but that they did not on that account fairly come within that classification in which the lion. Gentleman desired to place them. They cannot and ought not to be treated in the manner in which the Fenians, for example, were treated on the occasion to which the hon. Gentleman has referred. That is all I need say, I think, on the well-worn theme of the dynamite prisoners now serving their term of imprisonment. I will say a few words upon the Debate upon Cretan affairs raised by the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean and by the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down. I do not think I need say very much on the subject; it must be felt by the House that this is not the time at which it would be possible for the Government to give a full account of the exact state of the negotiations now taking place. A full account of the main lines of the policy of the Government has been often given, and does not require to be repeated; of the details of the negotiations with the other Powers by which that policy is to be carried into effect, this is hardly the time to speak. I think both the Gentlemen who have addressed us seem to hold, as we certainly hold, that the discussion on foreign affairs should be delayed until some time when we can take it up with more liberty, and can take the House into our full confidence in regard to the course of the negotiations dealing both with Crete and Greece. Let me further say that I think the hon. Gentleman's reference to recent events in Canea is calculated to give an extremely false impression both to the House and the country. I believe I am right in saying that the most regrettable incident to which he referred is one of three incidents only in which the Mahommedan population, or any section of them, have got out of hand; and, considering the perennial hostility between the two sections of islanders, the constant attacks to which the Mahommedans have been subjected, and that through all these months it is the Christians who have been on the offensive and the Mahommedans on the defensive, I think we have reason to congratulate ourselves that, on the whole, matters have not been worse than they have been. I think very little would be served by recapitulating the equally regrettable incidents which have marked on many occasions the actions of the insurgents. The hon. Gentleman is perfectly well aware that such incidents have occurred, and such incidents are, I fear, inevitable when you are dealing with a state of things such as prevails now in Crete. But I think common justice both to the Admirals, to the European troops, and to the Mahomedan population ought to compel us to say that, on the whole, the deplorable, act of retaliation to which reference has been made is but one of a very small number of similar acts which were done, most unfortunately, but which were done under very serious provocation. The hon. Gentleman appears to think that we are to blame for not having succeeded in convincing the great majority of the inhabitants of Crete that their best interests would be served by at once accepting the solution of the situation suggested by the Powers, and that they might find in us the true friends of Crete and Greece. I do not know whether we have been guilty of any acts of omission in this respect, but the persons who have been most sedulously occupied in telling the Cretans that ail our efforts were misguided, and that the end of those efforts must be failure, have been the hon. Gentleman and those who have spoken as he has in this House. [Cheers.] The right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean seems to be under the impression that things in Crete are going from bad to worse. Undoubtedly a condition of disorganisation and anarchy cannot last as long as it has lasted in Crete without producing very deplorable consequences, and leaving behind it many regrettable remembrances which it will take long, perhaps, wholly to efface. But I think I can assure the House that we need not take a pessimistic view of the future of the island. The difficulties of the situation, no doubt, are great, and they are aggravated, and must be aggravated, by the fact that we have not only to deal with the problem of Crete, but also with the more difficult and pressing problem of the settlement of the basis of peace between Turkey and Greece. But although those difficulties have to be contended with, I see no reason why they should not be surmounted. This is a transitional epoch, and I fully grant that we cannot expect to see order restored in Crete until the transitional method of dealing with the situation which the Powers have been driven to adopt shall have come to an end. It is not until there is a governor with a gendarmerie at his disposal, it is not until those elements of good government are established in Crete, that we can hope to see there the fruits of liberty and autonomy which, I cannot doubt, will in Crete, as elsewhere, do so much to promote the happiness of the inhabitants of the island. ["Hear, hear!"]

said that he did not rise for the purpose of making any criticism upon what the right hon. Gentleman called the policy of the Government, but only to call attention to the fact that, as far as the public could judge, no progress whatever was being made in carrying out that policy. Three months had now elapsed since the right hon. Gentleman's declaration that the policy of the Government was "Peace for Europe and autonomy for Crete." As far as Crete was concerned, we were not one step more advanced than we were in March, and the population of the island was almost more exasperated and distrustful than it had ever been. People were watching, the conduct of the Powers and of the Government with astonishment and regret. The first and obvious course for them to take would be to procure the removal of the Turkish troops. He did not believe that there would have been any great difficulty in pacifying the Cretan people if those troops had been removed. That step would have been an earliest of the good intentions of the Powers, in which it was almost impossible for the Cretans to believe while the Turkish troops remained in the island. If it was said that the troops could not be removed for fear of attacks by the Christians on the Mussulman population, it must be clear that the only alternative course would be to settle at once the terms of autonomy and to bring these terms to the knowledge of the Cretan people. Last Tuesday the First Lord of the Treasury told them, however, that no progress had been made, and that the terms of autonomy had not yet been settled. In those circumstances they were bound to suppose that the concert of Europe was as much divided on this subject as it had been on other matters, and that the suspicions and jealousies which had prevented the Powers from co-operating in other directions were also preventing them from cooperating in regard to Crete. He regarded the present position with the greatest anxiety, and feared that the prolongation of the state of tension in Crete might influence gravely the situation on the mainland and might even endanger that European peace for the preservation of which they were told such sacrifices had been made.

said that the right Lon. Gentleman who had just sat down (Mr. Bryce) evidently belonged to the class of the unteachable. He complained of no progress being made in the pacification of Crete during the past two mouths. He had evidently forgotten that his friends were largely responsible for the unfortunate events in Greece, and so for the postponement of the pacification of Crete. Had they not all heard of the famous telegram sent by 100 Members of that House, which had some influence in precipitating Greece into the unfortunate struggle in which she had engaged? He did not know whether the right hon. Gentleman himself signed that telegram, but, if he did not, he was quite capable of signing it.[Laughter.] The right hon. Gentleman, who complained that no progress had been made in Crete, might recollect with profit this and similar episodes. He had rejoiced to hear the Leader of the House render justice to the conduct of the Mussulmans in Crete, and he thought it was time that hon. Members opposite should consider seriously what had been the practical outcome of their policy of vilifying and abusing the Turkish Sovereign, the Turkish Government, and the Turkish people. Whom had they thereby benefited? Had they benefited the Armenians, or the Cretans, or their protégés. the Greeks? They had absolutely done no good to any class, or nation, or interest in the world by their policy of atrocity mongering and sham sentiment. [Opposition cries of "Oh!"]

Is it sham sentiment when there have been 100,000 deaths in Armenia?

said the number of 100,000 was a great exaggeration; but the violent and calumnious attacks upon Turkey and Mussulmans in general, long before any real atrocities had occurred in Asia Minor, were largely responsible for the subsequent troubles and loss of life which he had always deeply deplored. It would, indeed, be wise for hon. Gentlemen opposite to consider whether the course of injustice and calumny towards Turkey in which they had indulged for the last two years had been successful in any way, even from a party point of view. He agreed that it would be unwise to attempt to discuss now in detail the terms of peace between Turkey and Greece. It was generally accepted in this country that Turkey was practically forced into the war, and as the Turkish Government had behaved with remarkable forbearance and moderation before and during the struggle, he trusted that after it they would show themselves to be magnanimous. But it was hardly the right way to induce the Turkish Power to be forbearing to attribute to it constantly—as was recklessly done by a section of the English Press—every sort of malign and unjust motive in the peace negotiations. It was only natural that a Power which had been forced into war and which had been victorious, should claim certain advantages. To deliberately charge that Power with unfairness, evil intent, and underhand dealing, because it endeavoured to do its best for its own people, was a monstrous and very unwise act in the interests of Greece and of general peace. [Cheers.] The House ought not to overlook the tremendous dangers to which this war exposed Turkey. It was not only the danger of meeting Greece, because that was a comparatively small one, but it was the tremendous danger that the other Balkan States, and even Russia herself, should join in the war against Turkey. In his opinion, Turkey and Greece ought to be friends, and not enemies, and he was glad to say that he found that opinion shared by many leading personages both in Greece and Turkey. [Cheers.] Greece was the one anti-Slav State in the Balkan Peninsula, and Turkey was, of course, the chief bulwark for guarding Constantinople and the Straits against Slavonic conquest. That these two countries should have endeavoured to weaken each other by a wholly needless war was deplorable. If it was true that there was a powerful influence in Europe Which had encouraged Greece in its unfortunate attack upon Turkey, a great and desperate crime had been committed for which he hoped the Power that was responsible alight some day have to suffer. The conspicuous feature of the war was the manifestation of the true power of Turkey and the high qualities of the Turkish people, whose strength many people in this country had been inclined to underestimate. The war had proved that Turkey was a very important military Power; it had proved beyond all doubt the splendid courage of her soldiers, and it had also proved how great was the discipline and good conduct of the Turkish troops. He hoped these facts would be remembered when hon. Gentlemen opposite were led to indulge in indiscriminate abuse of Turkey. British influence did not, at present, stand high at Constantinople. He lamented the fact, which was largely due to the hon. Gentlemen who took part in this atrocity-mongering campaign. It was also largely due to the errors of the British representative at Constantinople. ["Hear, hear!] Other Powers had had the intelligence, while many persons in England had been raving and abusing Turkey without rhyme or reason, to offer their support and protection to Turkey, and the result was that other Powers had gained the influence which we had lost. German policy had been as wise towards Turkey as British policy had of late been unfortunate. In any great Eastern struggle, such as we might find ourselves involved in at any time, as also in a great European war, the balance of military power would be held by those splendid Ottoman troops. As to the speech of the hon. Member for Mayo with respect to Crete, the hon. Member had shown his usual onesidedness and intemperance of language. The value of the hon. Member's opinion on Eastern questions might be gauged from the indiscriminate condemnation which he passed on the Imperial qualities of the Anglo-Saxon race. The hon. Gentleman said that the Anglo-Saxon race alone exhibited a total incapacity for sympathy with and humanity to inferior races.

I said to insurgent and suffering, people.

said he would adopt the words of the hon. Member, and say that no race showed so much capacity for sympathy with suffering people as the Anglo-Saxon race. The history of India should have given the hon. Member pause in such a statement. [Cheers.] In the whole of his speech the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dillon) had made no single reference to the outrages and massacres committed by the Cretan Christians on Mahomedans. For he last 12 months, and especially for the last five months, the Christians had murdered every Mussulman, man, woman, or child, they could get hold of. In one district 1,100 were massacred in a fortnight; and the other day 300 orphan Mahomedan children were sent from Crete to Constantinople. This question was always treated by Members opposite in a onesided way. In the case of Armenia none of the many atrocity-mongers ever said a word as to the fact that many of those unfortunate massacres were started by Mussulman refugees from Bulgaria of twenty years ago, who had seen their homes destroyed and their families outraged and murdered by Christian invaders, and who themselves were forced to leave all that was dear to them and to take refuge in the towns and villages of Asia Minor. Nor was any reference made by our Turcophile politicians to the deliberate provocation given by the Armenian revolutionary conspirators, in order to provoke Mussulman reprisals. These facts were not a complete justification, but should be borne in mind in considering the question. ["Hear, hear!"] There was a great deal to be said for Turkey and the Turks, and if the events that had taken place only led hon. Gentlemen to be fair and just to the Mussulman, something would have been accomplished for the future peace and good government of these Eastern countries. ["Hear, hear!"] The hon. Member was anxious that the Turkish troops should be hustled out of Crete. Everyone bore witness to the admirable discipline and good conduct of those troops, and upon their presence in the island depended the lives and fortunes of 100,000 Mussulman refugees. The returns showed that the Mussulman population of Crete had been greatly under-rated. There were over 100,000 Mussulmans, and at least 60,000 were now dependent on charity. The Christian insurgents had driven them from their homes and seized their food and their property. If the Turkish troops were removed from Crete, and unless the Powers were prepared to treble the European forces there, the lives of the Mussulmans would be in danger, and there would be scenes of carnage which would throw into the shade the worst deeds of Armenia. Moreover, the sailors of the allied fleets now on shore were actually dependent for their protection upon the Turkish troops. He was glad to know that there had been a great improvement in the public knowledge and feeling in this country on the Cretan question, and especially with regard to the character of the Turks. He hoped before long to see the old policy of friendly pressure substituted for the new policy of hostile coercion. There was sonic chance of restoring the old understanding and good feeling between Turkey and England, which was absolutely necessary for the power and well-being of both countries.

said that he should be sorry to hold the Government responsible for the hon. Member for the Ecclesall division; but he would advise them, if they wished to curtail debate, to muzzle the hon. Member. ["Hear, hear," and laughter.] When the hon. Member threw across the House such terms as "sham sentiment" and "atrocity-mongering," and advocated a return to the alliance between this country and Turkey, it was more than flesh and blood could stand. [Cheers.] But the hon. Member stood alone in his views; and there was a fixed determination on both sides that never again under any circumstances should there be any alliance between this country and Turkey. [Cheers, and cries of "Oh!"] "Sham sentiment" meant that people had deplored and denounced the massacre of 100,000 human beings; and "atrocity-mongering" meant that meetings had been held to express the indignation which had been excited. He preferred such sham sentiment to the genuine sentiment of the hon. Gentleman; and as to such atrocity-mongering, the country would have been false to its best traditions if it had not taken part in it. No one denied the bravery of the Turkish troops; but the victory did not alter the merits of the struggle, which was between civilisation on the one side and savagery on the other. [Cheers, and cries of "No!"] Did any one propose to hand over to Turkey, except for perhaps a fortress or pass, a single rood of the land which had been won back to civilisation and Christianity? The world had made up its mind with regard to Turkey. [Cheers.]

said that undoubtedly there were Members in this House—and he was one of them—who held that Turkey should not be deprived of the fruits of her victory. [Cries of "Oh!"] Turkey had succeeded where the whole Concert of Europe had failed. The Concert of Europe had been engaged for months in the endeavour to get the Greek troops out of Crete; they were defied by Greece and by Colonel Vassos, and they could not get a single man or gun out of the island. It was reserved for the despised Turk, by a series of the most brilliant and glorious victories she had ever won—[Cries of "Oh!"]—to effect that which the Concert of Europe failed to effectt, and Dow the Greek soldiers had left Crete. The Turk had drawn the chestnuts out of the fire for the Concert; was he to have no chestnut for himself—all the more that it was his own chestnut? Thessaly was at this moment under mortgage to Turkey for the payment of the debt due to it by the Greek Government. By the Convention of May 1881, the Powers of Europe undertook to fix the portion of the foreign Government debt which should be paid by Greece in consideration of the cession to her of Thessaly. The Powers of Europe had never to this day done their duty, and Greece had bean permitted to occupy the territory without assuming that portion of the debt which belonged to her. Now the mortgagee had come into possession. Turkey had a double claim to a portion at least of this territory. She had the claim of a mortgagee in possession, and the claim of every victor who had been put to the hazard of war and won the hazard. But there was more than this. The Ottoman Empire had been forced to defend itself first against the most disorderly and lawless bands, whom even the Greeks themselves now repudiated, and then against the Greek regulars. Was the sacrificed expenditure of blood by Turkey alone not to be regarded in all the history of war? Did not Turkey herself have to pay a large indemnity to Russia? And that indemnity had been paid punctually as arranged year by year. There was not a penny of that debt in arrear at this moment. He believed that an indemnity of 10 millions was not at all an excessive indemnity for Greece to pay; but whether that was so or not, at any rate Turkey was entitled to hold as a pledge for the payment of that indemnity the territory she had conquered until the indemnity was paid. He hoped the Government would not commit themselves to what he considered would be the tremendous blunder of undertaking to coerce Turkey to leave the conquered territory before she had received adequate satisfaction for the sacrifices she had undergone. He doubted, indeed, whether it was in the power of this country or the whole Concert of Europe to turn the Turks out of Thessaly now they were there; even assuming that they all agreed to attempt the task. He urged another point. From the newspapers he gathered that the Ambassadors at Constantinople had been made plenipotentiaries for the purpose of conducting the negotiations. He trusted that was not the ease, and that Her Majesty's Government would themselves keep control of the negotiations. It would be improper to avoid saying that Her Majesty's Government at Constantinople had failed in every one of the five plans which he had proposed—[Cries of "Oh"!]—for the improvement of the Turkish Empire. That being so, that Ambassador was not a man to be left there as plenipotentiary to settle on behalf of England the terms of this most important peace—a peace, the terms of which would affect the future of Europe for many generations.

took the opportunity of protesting against the policy of the Government with regard to the continuance of slavery over the area in East Africa over which they had direct control. Last week the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs stated that our Administrator at Mombasa had received instructions to exercise his discretion as to whether or not slaves should be given up when demanded. That was directly contrary to a declaration of the late Attorney General two years ago, that any British subject who should receive or detain a slave was guilty of an unlawful act. He held in his hand several demands made by our Administrator in East Africa to the Church Missionary Society, and he protested—and he believed t he country as a whole would agree in the protest—against the continuance of such a system.