I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, when Her Majesty's ship "Victorious" was sent to the China station, it was the belief of the Admiralty that she could be docked at Hong Kong; whether this has been found to be too dangerous: what progress is being made in the exe- cution of the plan for the addition to the Hong Kong Naval yard; and whether the arrangements with the Hong Kong Dock Company for the construction of a larger dock have fallen through?

There is no question as to the capacity of the Hong Kong Dock. It is quite capable of receiving the "Victorious," though the margin is small. Later experience gained in clocking heavy vessels very little inferior in size to the "Victorious" has caused the Hong Kong officers to report that, in consequence of the existence of a current across the entrance to the dock at the very moment of high-water, when it is necessary to dock large ships, a certain amount of risk would be involved on account of the difficulty of managing the ship with sufficient nicety in passing her in. As there are docks in Japan which will take the "Victorious," it is not considered desirable to run any such risk. Sharps Buildings and the North Barracks have been acquired, thus doubling the size of the yard. The utilisation of the buildings thus obtained, as shops, storehouses, &c., is proceeding under the direction of the Commodore, and the arrangements made with the Colonial Government for the widening of Murray Road are being carried out. No arrangement has been concluded with the Dock Company for the construction of a larger dock. The Admiralty have now under consideration a proposal to construct a clock of their own, as part of the Dockyard Extension provided for in the Naval Works Acts.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will have the recreation ground attached to the Royal Engineering College at Devonport put in such condition that the 200 students may have the enjoyment of it, which at present is so rough and covered with stones as to be a source of danger to those playing on it?

The recreation ground has only recently been made. Provision will be made in the Estimates for the necessary work to complete it.

On behalf of the honourable Member for South Monaghan, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that rules exist in the county of Lancashire and parts of Wales preventing Irish reared swine from being kept by the people of districts mentioned for fattening; whether he is aware that the Irish Veterinary Department have promised that no pigs suffering from disease will be allowed to be shipped from Irish ports; and if he will endeavour to get the County Council of Lancashire, and parts of Wales referred to, to relax rules mentioned, which cause great loss to the rearers of pigs in Ireland?

The regulation made by the Lancashire County Council prohibiting the introduction of swine into the county from Ireland, except for slaughter, was revoked as from the 1st ult., but I believe that similar regulations are still in force in some of the Welsh counties. Doubtless the Irish authorities do all that they can to prevent the exportation of diseased animals, but there is still a danger of the introduction of disease by that means, and I am not surprised that the local authorities concerned should desire to protect their districts from it. The matter is one entirely within their own discretion, and I cannot undertake to do more than bring under their notice any representations I may receive on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if his attention has been drawn to the alleged existence of excessive and continuous overwork on the part of the Surveyors of Taxes, arising from the large increase in the number of assessments and of taxable property, the numerous changes of late years in fiscal legislation and other causes, and intensified by the quinquennial valuation made this year; and, if he is taking any, and what, steps to remedy this condition of things, and to ensure that the revenue of the country is not being prejudiced by the amount of responsible work now thrown upon the Surveyors of Taxes, and which they are not able to cope with.

My attention has been drawn to the existence of overwork on the part of the Surveyors of Taxes, and in November last the Treasury sanctioned the creation of between 20 and 25 new Tax Districts. Steps have already been taken, by the appointment of additional Assistant Surveyors (who are now employed in rendering assistance) with a view to the creation of the new districts as soon as the necessary arrangements can be made. It is hoped that this may remove any undue pressure in the ordinary work, which the Board are naturally anxious to avoid, and the matter shall be carefully watched. As regards the quinquennial valuation, it is, of course, impossible permanently to increase the staff of surveyors in order to meet work which is temporary. The surveyors are supplied with extra clerical assistance, and, in the more pressing cases, with aid from the head office. I think, however, that it should be considered whether, before the next quinquennial assessment, some better means of meeting the pressure at these particular times cannot be devised.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the case that when the number of Lieutenant-Generals (Cavalry and Infantry) was fixed at 13 there were only two Lieutenant-Generals' Commands in India (exclusive of the Commander-in-Chief), but that now, since the new organisation of the Indian Army, there are four such commands (exclusive of the Commander-in-Chief); whether some vacant Lieutenant-Generals' Commands have lately been given to Major-Generals; and whether, under these circumstances, it is proposed to increase the establishment of Lieutenant-Generals by two?

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer, in the absence of my honourable Friend. The answer to the first paragraph of my honourable and gallant Friend's question is in the affirmative. Three commands as Lieutenant-General have lately been given to. Major-Generals, not because of insufficiency in the establishment of Lieutenant-Generals, but because the officers in question were considered to be, under all the circumstances, most suitable for those commands. It is not proposed to increase the establishment of Lieutenant-Generals.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether any (and, if any, how many) cases of rabies, have occurred within the county of Middlesex within the last six months; and 'whether, considering that the order-relating to the muzzling of dogs had been rescinded in other counties adjoining, he-can see his way to rescind it in the county of Middlesex?

No case of rabies is known to have occurred in Middlesex during the past six months, but, for the reasons which I have on several occasions explained, I do not consider that the Muzzling Order at present in force in that county and the rest of the Metropolitan Police District could as yet be safely withdrawn.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Board of Customs have issued, for the information of their staff, copies of the reply of the Lords of the Treasury to the memorial from the Civil Servants in reference to superannuation; and whether, as the staffs of the Inland Revenue and the Post Office are large and widely scattered, arrangements can be made to issue the reply with the General Orders of the Board of Inland Revenue and the Post Office Circular?

Copies of the Treasury Letter of the 16th of January were circulated by the Board of Customs to their staff by a General Order dated the 28th of January 1899; and similar steps will be taken by the Post Office and the Inland Revenue Department.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will grant a return showing the increase within the last 10 years of the work which British Consuls are called upon to perform, and contrasting their duties and salaries with those of the Consular officers of other countries?

This return, so far as it relates to our own Consuls, could not be prepared without very great labour, and we have no information as to the Consular officers of other countries which would enable us to make a real comparison of their relative duties and salaries with those of our own Consular officers.

Could not some inquiries be made?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is now prepared to lay upon the Table of the House the Report of the departmental inquiry on the question of compulsory sick clubs?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department has not yet received the Report of the Committee to which the honourable Member refers; but the Report is in the printers' hands, and it will not be long before it is submitted to him.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what was the strength of the Regular Army, Army Reserve, and Militia together, on the 1st day of January 1889, as compared.with the numbers on the 1st day of January 1895?

The numbers of the effective non-commissioned officers and men on the dates mentioned are as follows:—1st January 1895, Regular Army, 213,555; Army Reserve, 82,804: Militia, 112,541; total, 408,900. 1st January 1899, Regular Armv, 222,373; Army Reserve, 78,798; Militia, 107,753; total, 408,924.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether a Scotsman wishing to join a Scottish Cavalry Regiment can enlist especially for the Royal Scots Greys, or can only enlist for the corps of Dragoons, on the chance of being allowed to complete his service in the Royal Scots Greys?

Cavalry recruits are informed on enlistment that they are liable to be posted to other regiments of the same corps, but that every effort will be made to meet their desire for service in a particular regiment. The Scots Greys come under this rule.

May I ask whether a new arrangement has not been made by which soldiers can enlist in particular cavalry regiments?

Soldiers do enlist in particular cavalry regiments, and they remain in those regiments subject to the convenience of the service.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the intention of the Government to confer any decoration on the Egyptian troops who took part in the Atbara-Omdurman operations, as was done with respect to the campaign of 1882–5?

The answer that I have to give to my honourable and gallant Friend is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state the date on which the communication was addressed to the French Government on the subject of compensation for the families of British officers killed by French, troops at Waima, referred to by Mr. Curzon in reply to a Question on 21st July last; whether any reply has been received; and whether, if no reply has been received, Her Majesty's Government contemplate making such representations to the Government of the French Republic as may be required in order to obtain a settlement of the claims in question?

A communication was addressed to the French Government on 11th July 1898. No reply has yet been received. It is proposed to deal with the claims in question in connection with others arising out of affairs in West Africa now under consideration.

Is my right honourable Friend aware that that answer has been steadily given for the last three years?

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to a serious accident at the Great Northern Railway Company's goods station, Deansgate, Manchester, on Thursday last, by which Charles Kelly, porter, of Manor Street, Ashton Old Road, and Samuel Carter, of Mansfield Street, Oldham Road, Manchester, were caught by a rope in connection with a hydraulic capstan, and were seriously injured, and admitted to the Manchester Infirmary as in-patients; whether his attention has been drawn to the death of J. Cavanagh, at the end of December last, at the capstan situated in the goods yard of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company, Oldham Road, Manchester, and to various other accidents which have occurred at the same place in the last few years, and would he send down a competent inspector to report on these capstans, and see if he could not suggest some improvements by applying treadles, so as to stop the revolution of the capstans, or otherwise, so as to diminish the losses of life and limbs which have unfortunately occurred at these two yards; and would he ascertain how many accidents, and their nature, have occurred during the last five years at the capstans at the two places indicated above?

The Board of Trade are in communication with the companies on this subject. It appears that the Great Northern Railway goods station was only opened last July, and that the machinery is of the most modern pattern and already provided with a treadle. I shall be happy to furnish the honourable Member with the result of the communications and also the number of accidents at the two places indicated.

On behalf of the honourable Member for Battersea I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state the amount of cubic space insisted upon by the Local Government Board for each adult person living in registered common lodging houses; whether he is aware that the lascar seamen employed on the P. and 0. steamship "Caledonia," now lying in the Victoria, and Albert Dock, have less than 70 cubic feet of space per person alloted to them; whether this dock is under the supervision of the Sanitary Authority for the Port of London; and whether the Local Government Hoard have control over the Port Sani-tarv Authority; and, if so, whether the President of the Local Government Board will give instructions for the Port Sanitary Inspector to inspect the forecastles of all P. and 0. steamships, and insist upon the lascar crews having proper accommodation provided for them?

The amount of cubic space which should be required for each person in a registered common lodging house is a, matter to be determined by the local authority, and is not subject to the approval of the Local Government Board. I am informed that the cubic space allotted to lascar seamen on board the "Caledonia" is 70 cubic feet or upwards. The dock appears to be within the district of the Sanitary Authority for the Port of London. I have communicated with the officers of the Port Sanitary Authority, and I understand that the amount of accommodation to be provided for lascar seamen is considered to be prescribed by an East Indian Act, and that if the allotted space is less than that prescribed by law proceedings are taken by summons under the Public Health Act.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the number of lascars employed as sailors, firemen, coal-trimmers, boys, and assistant cooks on board the P. and O. steamship "Sumatra," which is due to leave London on 3rd March 1899; whether he can state how many cubic feet of space is provided for each lascar in the forecastles set apart for their use; whether the said vessel is a British registered vessel, registered in the United Kingdom; and whether the lascar crew of the said vessel have allotted to them the cubic accommodation as provided by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894?

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the number of lascars employed as sailors, firemen, coal-trimmers, boys, and assistant cooks on board the Peninsular and Oriental steamship "Arcadia," which is due to leave London on the 9th March; whether he can state how many cubic feet of space is provided for each lascar in the forecastles set apart for their use; whether the said vessel is a British registered vessel registered in a port in the United Kingdom; and whether the lascar crew of the vessel have allotted to them the cubic accommodation as provided by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894?

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the number of lascars employed as sailors, firemen, coal-trimmers, boys, and assistant cooks on board of the Peninsular and Oriental steamship "Caledonia," which is due to leave London on 2nd March 1899; whether he can state how many cubic feet of space is provided for each lascar in the forecastles set apart for their accommodation; and whether the said vessel is a British ship registered in the United Kingdom; and whether the lascar crew of this vessel have allotted to them the cubic accommodation as provided by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894?

With the permission of the House I will reply to all the Questions at once. The P. and O. steamers "Sumatra," "Arcadia," and "Caledonia" are British, registered vessels. The "Sumatra" is to carry 65, the "Arcadia" 132, and the "Caledonia" 157 lascars in the capacities mentioned in the Questions. The space allotted to each lascar on the "Sumatra" is rather over 71 cubic feet, on the "Arcadia" 70.6 cubic feet, and on the "Caledonia" 79 cubic feet. There is thus, in the first two cases, rather less, and in the third, somewhat more, space than is required under the Imperial Act. It will, perhaps, be for the convenience of the House that I should take this opportunity of explaining the position of the law as regards crew space. Under section 210 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, each seaman or apprentice is to have appropriated for his use a space of not less than 72 cubic feet and of not less than 12 superficial feet. For each contravention of this requirement the owner of the ship is liable to a fine not exceeding £20. If this were the only section operating the law "would be clear, but it is not. Under the Indian Merchant Shipping Acts, only six superficial and 36 cubic feet are required. Under section 123 of the English Act of 1894, the master or owner of any ship may enter into an agreement with lascars, and the unrepealed provisions of an old Act of the 4th Year of King George IV, specially empowering the Indian Government to make regulations with respect to the accommodation of lascars, are safeguarded. The effect of these various enactments is, that it is by no means clear whether the direct obligation in respect to crew space of the English Act or the Indian Acts obtains in regard to lascars The exact effect of these provisions has been referred for the advice, of the Law Officers of the Crown, and the Board of Trade are in communication with the Indian Government through the India Office with regard to the provisions of their law.

Arising out of that answer, I should like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether, in the case of a vessel not providing the crew with the necessary accommodation in accordance with the law, the Board of Trade will disallow any deductions from tonnage. Was not that done in the case of the "Australia," when she did not comply with the section?

The honourable Member is complicating the whole Question. I have endeavoured to show that the law is by no means clear, and that there is a cer- tain section of an old Act of George IV. which has not been repealed, and which enables captains of British ships, even sailing from British ports, to make arrangements with lascars in accordance with the regulations of the Indian Government. It is this obscurity which prevents the Board of Trade from taking up any position definitely at the present moment; but they recognise their obligation to proceed, in accordance with the law, whatever may be the ship or the company concerned. In order to obtain the best advice they can with regard to the law, the matter has been referred to the Law Officers of the Crown.

Is the right honourable Gentleman not aware that in June 1895 the Board of Trade issued a circular dealing with the crew space, and that in it they ordered their officers—

Order, order! The honourable Member must either accept the answer, or give notice of an additional Question in the usual way.

Then I will put further Questions on this on Monday.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the unsatisfactory condition of the medical service of the Volunteers, more particularly to the anomalous position of the brigade-bearer companies; and whether it is proposed to so organise the Volunteer medical service as to assimilate it to the regular medical service of the Army, both as regards rank to the medical officers and the organisation of the Volunteer Medical Staff Corps and the brigade-bearer companies, and thereby render it effective as one of the departments of the Volunteer force?

An increased establishment has been given to all companies of the Volunteer Medical Staff Corps, in order to complete the personnel for transport sections. An allowance will also be given to them to enable them to practise transport duties. There is no intention to make an alteration in the rank of Volunteer medical officers. The question of the reorganisation of the Volunteer infantry brigade-bearer companies is under consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the fact that the policeman Jones, in the employ of the Transvaal Republic, who has just been put upon his trial for the unprovoked murder of a British subject has been acquitted; and whether any steps can be taken to provide some measure of security for the lives of British subjects in the Transvaal?

Before an answer is given, I wish to ask whether this Question is in order. It speaks of "an unprovoked murder" of an Englishman in the Transvaal. Is an honourable Member entitled to prejudge a case in that way?

I must say that it is a rather irregular expression to use in a Question.

Then I withdraw the word "unprovoked."

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer in the absence of the Colonial Secretary? My right honourable Friend has received no information as yet, but no doubt the telegram in the newspapers correctly states the fact. The Colonial Secretary cannot express any opinion on the merits of the case until he is in possession of the full report of the trial, and he is not in a position to say whether any action is called for on the part of Her Majesty's Government.

Can the noble Lord say whether the Colonial Secretary will give this matter careful consideration?

I think my honourable Friend may safely assume that he will.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the action of the Local Government Board in dissolving, by sealed Order, the dispensary district of Johnstown, county Kilkenny, and in amalgamating it with the districts of Urlingford and Ballen; whether he is aware that there are nearly 3,000 inhabitants in the Johnstown district, and that there are almost 60 dispensary districts in Ireland with smaller populations, and 259 with smaller areas; whether, under the proposed change, no medical officer will be resident within the existing Johnstown dispensary district, imposing on the sick poor the necessity of travelling 14 miles by road to seek relief; whether, in consideration of the welfare of the poor, it has been decided upon to establish medical clubs in the district of Johnstown, as was done before the Poor Law system was introduced there; and, whether he will consider the propriety of making no change before the district councils come into operation?

The sealed Order referred to in the first paragraph was issued with my approval. There are 2,227 inhabitants in the portion of the Johnstown district which has been added to Urlingford dispensary district. There are not more than 20 dispensary districts with a smaller population than 2,227, but I cannot ascertain at such short notice the number with smaller areas than Johnstown dispensing district. Under the arrangement rendered necessary by the alteration in the boundary of the Union, the extreme distance which any sick person might have to travel to the dispensary will not be greater than that which such persons have hitherto had to travel under existing arrangements. I have no information relative to the fourth paragraph. The changes in boundaries, which the Board were compelled to make under section 68 of the Act of last year, dame into operation for the purpose of the first election, and the consequential altera- tion in the dispensary districts cannot be postponed to a period beyond the appointed day. There is nothing, however, to prevent the Board from recasting the dispensary districts in any Unions if the alterations can be proved to be productive of inconvenience to the sick poor.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is a fact that a large number of Chinese peasants have been killed by Russian soldiers near Talienwan for refusing to pay taxes to Russian collectors; by what right, international or treaty, Russian officers exercise such powers in Chinese territory; and whether the Chinese Government have protested against such action; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government will support their protest?

The powers of the Russian authorities in the districts leased to them in China are detailed in an agreement between Russia and China, which is among the papers shortly to be laid before Parliament. The agreement contemplates the government of the district being entrusted to Russian officials, and it is for the Chinese Government to take action if such powers are exceeded. I fear that as to the facts of this case I can add nothing to the information already given.

The right honourable Gentleman has not answered the last paragraph of this Question, and I must ask him to reply to it.

I am not aware whether the Chinese Government have yet taken action with regard to these powers.

I should like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether, if the Chinese Government do make this protest, Her Majesty's Government will support them?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the officer commanding the London Irish Volunteers declared that he had no trust or confidence in Roman Catholics, and, considering that the regiment is one of the most loyal and efficient in the Volunteer Force, largely composed of Irishmen and Catholics, inquiry will be made into the matter, with the view of assuring the men in the regiment that the commanding officer, in making such declaration, had not the approval of the War Office authorities?

The question apparently refers to an unhappily worded letter written in November, 1897, to a friend and brother officer by the officer commanding the London Irish Volunteers. The letter had reference to an individual officer, and was marked distinctly "private."

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the urgent necessity for burying ground at Larne, county Antrim; and whether he will suggest to the Local Government Board the desirability of making inquiry into the matter with the view of causing sufficient burial accommodation to be provided for the people of that district?

An inquiry into this matter was held by the Engineering Inspector of the Local Government Board on Monday last.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the objections felt by many medical men at having their patients visited by the public vaccinator, he will take into consideration the desirability of paying for vaccination, by the family medical attendant?

I have no information to the effect that objections are felt by many medical men at having their patients visited by the public vaccinator. The duty of the public vaccinator to visit the home of an unvaccinated child does not arise until the child has attained the age of between four and five months, unless the parent requests him to visit the home at an earlier date. There is, therefore, ample opportunity for the private practitioner to perform the operation if it is desired. The suggestion of the honourable Member was fully discussed during the passage of the Bill last year, but was rejected by a majority of more than two to one, and I see no reason for altering that decision now.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, if he will state whether the arrangements made between the Postmaster-General and the Treasury regarding the performance of duties at seaside towns by convalescent clerks of the Central Telegraph Office and the Metropolitan districts have been completed; and, whether the Postmaster-General can make the terms public?

In future the practice will be limited to the following eases:—(1) Those of officers who have broken down or are in danger of breaking down from overtime performed either compulsorily or in response to a call for volunteers. (2) Cases of actual or impending illness among such officers which can be certified as being due to causes specifically attributable to the nature of the officer's duties. The Treasury have not found it practicable to sanction the continuance of the practice referred to by the honourable Member, because there is no sufficient reason for giving to Post Office servants privileges in excess of those already accorded to the whole of the Civil Service, except so far as the conditions of postal work may be abnormal, and expose Post Office servants to risks of illness from which the servants of other Departments are free.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is responsible for advising Her Majesty to appoint the Rev. Henry Whitehead to the Bishopric of Madras, which had been previously filled by an Evangelical; whether he is aware that the Rev. Henry Whitehead w as not only a member or the English Church Union, bat is the Superior of the Oxford Mission at Calcutta, whose official anniversary sermon was preached by the Bishop of Lincoln at St. Mary Magdalene's on Epiphany Tide at a service announced in the parish magazine as High Mass, and at which banners, crucifixes, sacrificial vestments, multiplied lights, incense, sacring bells, and elevation were included, and above all there were no communicants; whether he is aware that, at the college chapel presided over by Mr. Whitehead, according to the "Tourists' Church Guide" published by the English Church Union, vestments, altar lights, incense, and other illegalities are practised; and whether this appointment may be taken as an indication of the ecclesiastical policy of Her Majesty's Government?

I am responsibe for advising as to the appointment recently made to the Bishopric of Madras. I am aware that Mr. Whitehead has of late held the official position of chaplain to the Bishop of Calcutta and Principal of the Bishop's College, Calcutta, and he has also voluntarily undertaken the work of Superior of the Oxford Mission in that city. As to the details of services held in this country in connection with the Oxford Mission, I have no information; nor can I understand why the Bishop Designate, who has been working continuously for the last 15 years in India, should be held responsible for them. The ritual practised in the Chapel of the Bishop's College at Calcutta has been and is such as is approved by the Bishop for the time being. The honourable Member must be aware that the interpretation of the law on this subject is a matter of much difficulty; but I am in a position to state that the Bishop Designate regards it as a duty not to go beyond the limits laid down in the Prayer Book, and that he is prepared to tender all due reverence and obedience to the Metropolitan. I may add that men of all phases of religious opinion speak in the highest terms of Mr. Whitehead's ministrations in India, and agree that, by his intellectual attainments, daily life, and devotion to duty, he has, wherever he has laboured, made Christianity a living and speaking reality. The honourable Gentleman asks mo if, from this one appointment, a general indication may be obtained of the ecclesiastical policy of the Government. The honourable Gentleman must know that any generalisation from a solitary appointment must be invidious and misleading; but, if he is disposed to indulge in such conjectures, I think it would be more appropriate for him to take as his illustration the appointment of Dr. Well don to the Bishopric of Calcutta, in which capacity, as Metropolitan of India, he is and will continue to be Mr. Whitehead's ecclesiastical superior.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, with reference to a letter of the Local Government Board addressed last December to one of the vaccination officers of the Reading Board of Guardians, in which it is stated that it would be contrary to the Board's practice to advise an officer of a board of guardians without reference to the guardians in a matter in which the guardians have jurisdiction, whether the matter submitted to the Local Government Board, and touched upon in their reply, was action by the vaccination officer in prosecuting defaulters under the Vaccination Acts; whether vaccination officers are to understand from this letter that in interpreting the instructions to vaccination officers in the Fourth Schedule to the General Vaccination Order of 18th October 1898, in sub-section (d) of section 6 of those instructions and elsewhere, that it is their duty in the first place to take the orders of the guardians as to prosecuting or not prosecuting defaulters, or to abstain from prosecuting any defaulter if so ordered by the guardians; whether, for several years before the Vaccination Act, 1898, the Local Government Board has left the boards of guardians free to decide whether prosecutions were to be undertaken or not, and has repeatedly addressed to the boards copies of the Evesham letter urging the boards not to repeat prosecutions; and, whether he will forthwith send a circular to all vaccination officers that they are to act according to the instructions given in the Reading letter referred to in this Question, and with the admitted practice which the Local Government Board has now allowed for several years past?

The honourable Member is under a misapprehension as to the correspondence to which he alludes. No such letter as that referred to in the Question was written by the Local Government Board in December last. But in January, 1898, one of the vaccination officers of the Reading Union wrote to the Board asking for their advice in the matter of vaccination, without specifying any particular point, and the reply to that letter was to the effect stated in the Question. As regards the second and fourth paragraphs, it will be obvious that the letter had no bearing on the instructions to vaccination officers in the Vaccination Order of 18th October 1898, as it was written nearly nine months prior to the issue of the Order. As regards the third paragraph, under the regulations which were in force until the present year, it was the duty of the guardians to cause proceedings, to be taken against persons in default under the Vaccination Acts, and for this purpose to give directions to the vaccination officer to institute and conduct the proceedings. It was the practice of the board to point out to the guardians that it was their duty to give directions to the vaccination officer accordingly. It was decided in the case of Bramble v. Lowe that, notwithstanding the regulations then in force, the power of taking proceedings was vested in the vaccination officer under the Vaccination Acts without any directions from the guardians, which were held to be superfluous; and, having regard to that decision and to the opinions given by the Law Officers of the Crown, the Board have not in their new Order imposed any duty either on the guardians or vaccination officer, as regards the institution and conduct of proceedings.

I shall put a fur-their Question on this matter.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if it is a fact that he has sanctioned the formation of a Sanitary Inspectors Examination Board as a limited company; if one of the objects of the Board is stated to be to prescribe courses of study and technical training; if local authorities and institutions providing instruction for those who desire to become sanitary inspectors are to have any representation on the Board; and, if so, how and to what extent; and, it he will consent to lay a copy of the memorandum and articles of association, sanctioned by him, upon the Table of this House?

An association has been formed, with the concurrence of the Local Government Board, for holding examinations of persons desirous of obtaining certificates of competency for the office of Sanitary Inspector or Inspector of Nuisances. The association has been registered as a company with limited liability. One of the objects of the association is to prescribe such course of study and technical training as may be calculated to ensure the fitness of persons desirous of qualifying for the offices above mentioned. Several bodies, some of whom provide instruction for those who desire to become Sanitary Inspectors, will be represented on the Examination Board, and representatives may be elected by such additional bodies as may from time to time be approved by the Local Government Board. I have no objection to laying a copy of the Memorandum and Articles of Association upon the Table of the House if the honourable Member thinks fit to move for it.

Is it intended to give this association any representation in the educational authorities about to be formed?

That will be a question for the authorities themselves to decide.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that complaints are rife of illegal trawling and destruction of nets and lines in the Moray Firth; and whether, before taking steps to replace the fishery cruiser "Brenda," which has unfortunately been wrecked, he will cause full inquiry to be made as to whether the "Brenda" and "Norna" have been found in practice efficient for police work?

I am informed by the Fishery Board that there are complaints of trawling in the Moray Firth by foreign fishing vessels, and there have been some complaints of damage to lines by these vessels. The only redress for this is in the law courts of the country to which the vessel belongs, as arranged by the North Sea Convention. The "Brenda" has not been wrecked. She has been got off the rocks, and is expected to arrive at Leith to-day, and it is hoped she will be ready to resume duty soon. The Fishery Board have found, so far, their fishery cruisers well adapted for the purpose for which they were intended, but it is premature to affirm that their suitability has yet been thoroughly tested.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state if the Honourable A. B. Morine, formerly a Minister of the Colony of Newfoundland, was dispensed from further service in his office by the Governor of the Colony on grounds appertaining to his conduct as a Minister?

Mr. Moraine was required by the Governor to resign office on the ground that he was the legal adviser of Mr. Reid, with whom the Colonial Government has entered into a railway contract.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether, having regard to the great public interest in the proposed alterations and erections at the corner of Parliament Street, he will furnish, for the inspection of Members of Parliament and the public, a model showing precisely the form and position of the contemplated buildings, as well as their relation to the line of Parliament Street?

To construct a model would cost more, and cause more delay, than I think the honourable Gentleman himself would think justifiable. I have already undertaken to exhibit the plans and elevations of the proposed new buildings, and with these I will exhibit a plan showing the future alignment of Whitehall from the Admiralty to Parliament Square. When honourable Members have these before them, I trust they will agree that they have all the information they will require.

Where will the plans be shown?

In the Tea Room.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether there is available any list or statement showing the Indian railway extensions already sanctioned, with the localities, aggregate mileage, and estimated cost of such extensions; whether a statement can be made at an early date of such further railway projects as are likely to be included in the forecasts for the financial year, with an estimate of the capital outlay thereon; and whether lists and estimates can also be given of the chief projects in hand and under consideration for water storage and irrigation in the different presidencies?

At page 88 et seq. of the Administration Report for 1897–8, which has been laid before Parliament, will be found a statement of the capital expenditure on the various railways to the 31st December, 1897, and at page 98 et seq. of the Financial Statement for 1898–9 the proposed grants for extensions in subsequent years. It is probable that the financial statement, which will be made on the 20th March and which will be subsequently laid before Parliament, will include the programme of further railway projects and irrigation works on which money will be spent in the coming year. With regard to irrigation works, I may also refer the honourable Member to page 12 of the appendix to the explanatory memorandum presented by me last year.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that at an anti-vivisection meeting held at Bradford on the 30th September last, Dr. Kerr, speaking against the proposed withdrawal of licences granted to vivisectors, said the effect of the proposed step would be to increase the number of illegal experiments on the bodies of living animals, and that such experiments were performed by many of his fellow doctors at Bradford, as it was necessary in the cause of science that such experiments should be made; whether he is aware that Dr. Kerr stated that Dr. Hines, of Horton Road, Bradford, was the only vivisector in Bradford who carried out experiments in vivisection under the licence required by law, and that Dr. Hines, who was present, stated that he had performed hundreds of vivisections, and should continue to do so; whether he is aware that the secretary of the Anti-Vivisection Society produced a list of licensed vivisectors, on which the name of Dr. Hines did not appear; and whether, in view of these facts, he intends to take any, and what, steps for the enforcement of the law against the practice of unlicensed vivisection?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department believes that at a somewhat excited meeting in Bradford on the date mentioned statements to the effect suggested were made. His attention was drawn to the matter at the time, and he caused inquiry to be made, but could not elicit any clear statement of what was actually alleged, nor any evidence of illegal vivisection being performed by Dr. Hime—not Hines. There are, therefore, no steps which he can take in the matter. I may add that it should be remembered that performing upon an animal an experiment calculated to give pain without a licence is an ordinary criminal offence which any person may prosecute.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the interpretation put by the Government inspector of vivisection operations on the effect of the Act when he states, in his preface to the last Returns, that the certificates dispensing with the use of anæsthetics make it obligatory on the holder not to use them even should he desire to do so and when he himself believes that the experiment could be carried on under anæsthetics; and whether he will take this interpretation of the Act by the Government inspector under his consideration?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department thinks that the honourable Member has entirely misconceived the meaning of the statement to which he refers. Perhaps I may explain the apparent difficulty. The Act lays down that experiments such as those in question can only be performed without anæsthetics by a person holding a certain certificate. If the experiment is to be performed under, or partly under, anæsthetics, the certificate required is quite different. The operator referred to possessed the former, but not the latter, certificate. Therefore, by using anésthetics, in his anxiety to avoid causing even the slightest pain to the animal, he committed a slight technical irregularity, which the inspector, in accordance with the usual practice, noticed in his annual Report.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the ceremonies used last week at the funeral of the late Rev. E. J. Vaughan, chaplain of the "St. Vincent" at Portsmouth; whether he is aware that the evening before the funeral vespers for the dead were sung, whilst throughout the night watches were kept beside the bier; and that on the day of the funeral, at eight in the morning, requiem mass was sung, whilst the usual funeral service was held in St. Michael's Church at two in the afternoon; whether this service was attended by several naval chaplains, besides naval officers, and also by a large contingent of boys from the training ship "St. Vincent"; and whether it was with the sanction of the Admiralty authorities that these ceremonies were observed and the boys brought to attend them?

As this funeral took place from the private residence of the deceased chaplain, and not in a naval cemetery, the arrangements for the religious service and the selection of a church in which a portion of it should take place were in the hands of the widow of the deceased officer. The Naval authorities took no part in arranging the religious part of the ceremony. Naval honours were paid, as they are always paid, irrespective of the religious denomination of the deceased officer or seaman. Whether an Anglican, a Dissenter, or Roman Catholic is buried, the purely naval part of the ceremony is, and ought to be, the same. The honourable Member must surely know that in civil life too respect is often shown by attendance at a funeral service quite irrespective of religious differences.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the extreme annoyance caused to the inhabitants of Fife by the fog syren recently erected on Inichkeith; and whether lie will take immediate steps to have it cither removed or so modified as not to interfere, with the sleep of the inhabitants?

I am informed by the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses that the Inchkeith fog syren was established by them at the urgent request of the shipping trade, and has already proved of great service. I have no power to order the removal of the syren, but the Commissioners will endeavour to mitigate the annoyance complained of by directing the horn away from the shore whenever that can be done with safety to navigation.

In view of the fact that for 20 miles inland the inhabitants are unable to sleep, will the right honourable Gentleman take steps to abate the annoyance with the least possible delay?

I cannot take upon myself the responsibility of recommending that the syren be made less noisy than is necessary for navigation purposes.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the Foyle Shipbuilding Yard at Londonderry, which was subjected to Government survey and duly certified, is now about to be re-opened for a local company under competent expert management; and whether the claims of Londonderry will be recognised in the arrangements for Admiralty orders to such degree as may be justified by the circumstances of the fitness and competency of the revived enterprise?

No communication on the subject has been made to the Admiralty. Due consideration will be given to any application for admission to the Admiralty list of the establishment in question.

May I ask the right honourable Gentleman whether due consideration will also be given to the claim of the shipbuilding interests in Cork Harbour to share in Admiralty work?

Consideration is always given to all yards capable of performing the work required; and after that it is a question of tender.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the fact that blood money on the authorised scale, has been granted to British officers wounded on service while employed in the Egyptian Army; and whether it is intended to extend similar treatment to those wounded in recent operations; if not, could he explain the reason; and, if so, when will such payments be commenced?

This matter is the subject of correspondence now passing between the War Office and the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Russian Minister at Pekin has protested against the terms of the Niu-chang Railway Extension Loan, recently subscribed for in London; if so, upon what grounds was such protest made; and, whether the British Government intend that the Chinese Government shall regard the terms of the loan as a binding engagement?

I beg at the same time to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Russian Minister at Pekin has protested against the control of the Chinese Northern Railway Extension Loan by British influence, against the appointment of an Englishman as chief engineer, and against the appointment of a qualified accountant; and what steps Her Majesty's Government propose to take for the protection of British interests and British capital?

We understand that the Russian Minister at Pekin has protested against certain terms of the Niuchang Railway Extension Loan on the grounds that the provisions of the agreement conflict with assurances given to Monsieur Pavloff by the Chinese Government in July last. Her Majesty's Government regard the loan as a binding engagement on the Chinese Government.

Were the points of the protest those named in my question?

Substantially, they were.

I beg to ask the Cinder Secretary of State for War whether it is the intention of the Government to disband the present 3rd Battalion, Devon Regiment, and add four companies to the present 4th Devon Regiment, and two to the Cornish Militia; whether it is a fact that the 3rd Devon Regiment is up to its numerical strength as regards men, with but two recent vacancies among the officers; and, whether either of the other two regiments have their full complement of men?

All action with regard to the proposed reduction of the Militia in the County of Devon has been suspended for the present.

When will a decision be come to?

We have already come to a decision to' suspend all action.

And when will you decide to suspend suspending action?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether a Committee was appointed last year by the Secretary of State for War to inquire into certain grievances of Warrant Officers; and whether that Committee has made a Report; if so, will it be published?

This Report has been received; it involves many details, which are at the present time under the consideration of the Military authorities.

When will the report be received?

It has been received, but I cannot say precisely when a decision will be came to on it.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will state the ships of Her Majesty's Navy which have received Belleville boilers, also the ships building or ordered which will receive them; whether these boilers have been made in France by the Belleville Company; and, if not, by whom are they made, and if any royalty or any charges are paid to the Belleville Company for Belleville boilers made in England; and, whether the right to make Belleville boilers is in any way patented or protected in England?

Belleville boilers have been or will be fitted in all battleships, commencing with the Canopus class; all first-class cruisers since and including the Powerful and Terrible; all second-class cruisers following the Talbot class; and six sloops of the Mutine class. Only one set of Belleville boilers, that for the Sharpshooter, has been made by the Belleville Company for Her Majesty's Navy; all others have been or are being made by machinery contractors in this country. Royalty is paid to the Belleville Company on all Belleville boilers so made. The right to make Belleville boilers is patented and protected in England.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, seeing that a large surplus is anticipated in the forthcoming Indian Budget, the provincial governments will have returned to them the balances they had to surrender to the supreme Government under financial pressure in former years; will the Salt Tax be reduced to the rate current in 1884–5; and, can some reduction in Import Duties imposed under the plea of financial pressure be granted?

The Indian Financial Statement will be made on the 20th of this month. The honourable Member must, I think, be aware that I cannot anticipate it, as I should do if I were to answer his Questions.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the police have orders to prevent the cattle fair being held in Ennis on 3rd March; and, if so, what are the grounds for such action on the part of the authorities?

The police have orders to take the names of any persons exposing cattle in the streets if Ennis at the fair to be held on the 3rd inst. and to have them summoned. At last Quarter Sessions the County Court Judge decided that the holding of fairs in the streets was quite illegal, and in the opinion of the local constabulary authorities the practice is a very serious inconvenience, as well as a source of danger, to the general public.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the circular sent to national school teachers m Ireland, requiring children to purchase from the school teacher school books and stationery of every description used by them at school, and also requiring the teachers to buy the same from the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, whether he is aware of the general and serious complaints as to the unfairness and inconvenience of the adoption of this rule; whether he is aware of the serious delay in attending to the orders sent to the Commissioners; whether the teachers are obliged to remit cash with the orders, and frequently months, and in some eases even years, pass before delivery is made to the teachers; and, whether, considering the loss and inconvenience to the children and the detriment to over 1,000 small stationers and booksellers throughout the country villages in Ireland, he will have inquiry made into the matter, with the view of throwing open for competition the supplying of these books and stationery in the same way as is done in England?

The regulation that all requisites for sale to pupils in national schools in Ireland should be purchased through the Office of National Education was made in the interests of the children attending these schools, in order to secure the best articles at the lowest prices for the children who, in Ireland, have to purchase their books and other requisites. The Commissioners are not aware that complaints of a general or serious character have been made on the subject. The goods are paid for before being issued from the Education Office. In the case of some articles a delay has occurred (but not to anything like the extent implied in the question) in supplying them, owing mainly to change of contractor, the result of contract being put up to public competition; also, to some other difficulties which, I am informed, will be but of a temporary character. Every opportunity is given to publishers and traders, as well as to managers of schools, to submit, for sanction for use, any article (either books or stationery) with the view to have it supplied, if not inferior to similar articles at present on the National Board's list. I am not in a position to speak as to the system pursued in England, but I believe there are considerable differences between the English and Irish systems that make any analogy of the kind drawn in the Question inapplicable.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware that the Bishop of Oxford, on being appealed to by the parishioners at Burnham, Bucks., has intimated that he disapproves of non-communicants being present during the celebration of the Holy Communion, and has decided that the school children should not be taken to church for such services; and whether he will, either by a provision in the Code, or by Circular, direct the managers of such schools to discontinue the practice where hitherto adopted of taking the children to attend Children's Eucharists as a substitute for the ordinary religious instruction?

I have no reason to doubt the honourable Member's account of the Bishop of Oxford's decision. It is no part of the functions of the Committee of Council on Education to interfere with religious instruction given to the children of voluntary schools.

I further ask whether persistence in a practice condemned by the Bishop in a Church of England school would not be treated as provocative of trouble in the school?

That is a matter of opinion, upon which the Committee of Council on Education cannot possibly express an opinion.

I shall put further Questions, and I beg further to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he has now received the report of the inquiry by the inspector into the alleged breach of the Conscience Clause at Burnham, Bucks.; whether it appears from the inquiry that Ada Lane was taken to the church to attend the Communion Service on 2nd February, although her father had objected; whether this was a breach of the 7th section of the Act of 1870; whether the schoolmaster alleged as an excuse that he was not aware that the father had objected; and, whether verbal intimations of objection and withdrawal of a child are recognised by the Department; and, if so, whether he will make this clear in the Code, or otherwise?

I received the report last Saturday. It appeared from the inquiry that, if the father had objected, his objection had not been communicated to the schoolmaster or the managers of the school. Thirty of the 36 children exempted from attendance at the religious service brought verbal intimations only. These were invariably accepted.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any proposal relating to a partition of the Samoan Islands has been made to Her Majesty's Government by another Power; and, if so, whether he can state the nature of the proposal, from what Power it emanated, and the answer made by Her Majesty's Government?

No formal proposal for a partition of the Samoan Islands has been made by any Power. Negotiations are proceeding between the three Powers on the subject of recent disturbances in Samoa, and I cannot make any statement at present.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the case of James Foley, late sergeant of the P Division, Metropolitan Police, has been brought to his notice; and, if not, whether he will make inquiry as to this mail having been reduced to a constable, after 11 years' service as a sergeant and 20 years' total service in the force, upon evidence alleged to be of a doubtful and conflicting nature which the accused was not given the opportunity of refuting?

The case referred to was fully investigated by the Commissioner of Police personally, and was adjourned in order to enable Foley to adduce evidence on his own behalf, which he failed to do. The Secretary of State sees no ground whatever for questioning the decision of the Commissioner.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that a large proportion of British troops are quartered in Ireland, and that a large number of Irishmen are serving in the British Army, he can say why, of the proposed convalescent homes for soldiers, not one is to be established in Ireland; and whether he will take steps to remedy this?

There is not the same necessity for establishing convalescent stations for soldiers in Ireland as in England, the Irish barracks being mostly situated among small populations and healthy surroundings. But so far as circumstances permit, arrangements will be made for the reception of convalescent soldiers in Ireland similar to those for other parts of the United Kingdom.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that William Sprowson, aged 17 years, was enlisted on the 10th November 1898, under the name of William Taylor, and as of the age of 18, in the 47th Regiment, the true facts being known to those who enlisted him; that his father, John Sprowson, in writing, demanded his discharge on the 11th February 1899; that the adjutant commanding at the depot, instead of forwarding the claim to the competent military authority, pursuant to section 100, sub-section 3, of the Army Act, 1881, replied that the recruit was so near the age of 18 that the general commanding would not approve of his discharge: whether, upon further remonstrances, the commanding officer at the depot requested a fresh claim to be sent in by the father, and, upon receipt of same on the 19th instant, interviewed the recruit and told him that if he would stay in the Army the matter would be settled, but if not he would be placed under arrest, which was immediately done; and whether inquiry will be made into the matter, and the recruit be discharged?

If a recruit makes a false declaration of age, and his true age is found to be over 17 years, his retention in the service or his discharge is entirely a question under the Queen's Regulations for the general officer commanding the district. In this case the general officer saw no ground for discharging the recruit. The attesting officer was not aware that this man was under 18 years of age, nor is it correct to say that he was informed that if he would remain in the Army the matter would be settled. He was made a prisoner at large for making a false answer on attestation, and released on receipt of the general's decision.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is in a position to state if there is any regulation as to the amount of cubic space allotted to each member of the crew on board Her Majesty's ships in the Royal Navy; and, if not, what is approximately the amount of cubic space provided for each man?

There is no such regulation. In warships the crew space is not definitely limited and enclosed as is usual in merchant ships. Consequently, it is difficult to give approximately the cubic space provided for each man. In practice each hammock occupies a space of about 70 cubic feet. As a rule, the cubic space per man exceeds this, as the hammock berths do not fully occupy the deck area.

On behalf of the honourable Member for South Mayo, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether a public meeting which was announced to be held at Kilmaine, county Mayo, on Sunday last, was proclaimed and attempted to be suppressed by the police; and if he can state on what grounds this interference with the right of public meeting was sanctioned by the Government, and for what reason the official notice calling for the suppres- sion of the meeting was not published until the morning of the day on which the meeting was held?

The intention to hold this meeting was announced by printed placard, which was in the following terms:—

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state the substance of the contracts at present existing between the Government in its various Departments and the Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Company, the dates of these contracts, and the amounts of the subsidies given by the Government to this Company?

The honourable Member will find full particulars of the contract between the Company and the Post Office for the conveyance of the Eastern and part of the Australian mails (including parcels) in the House of Commons Paper No. 259 of 1897. The contract is dated 25th May 1897, and provides for the payment of £330,000 per annum for seven years from 1st February 1898. All the mail contracts held by the, P. and O. were obtained, and have always been obtained, by them after being put up to public tender.

Where can we find anything as to the amount of the subsidy?

I think it amounts to about £11,000 for about three vessels. But, in all, we have a call on 13 or 14 vessels.

What do they receive for carrying troops?

I cannot answer that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the report in "The Times" of 28th February of the disgraceful scenes in St. Clement's Church, Belfast, and the attack on the house of the Rev. Mr. Peoples; and on what grounds such proceedings in Belfast are treated more leniently by the executive than similar proceedings in the South of Ireland?

It is a fact, as stated in "The Times" of Tuesday, that disorderly scenes took place in the church mentioned on Sunday last. The police supplied Mr. Peoples with the name and address of a boy who was stated to have participated in the disturbance, and escorted the reverend gentleman to his lodgings. No attempt was made to assault him. At the afternoon service the disorderly proceedings were renewed, and at the request of Mr. Peoples the police cleared the church. I am informed that a stone was thrown at Mr. Peoples' house on Sunday last, and a pane of glass broken. The honourable Member is quite in error in assuming, as he appears to do in the second paragraph, that such proceedings are treated differently in Belfast from the South of Ireland.

I wish to ask whether the police had instituted or meant to institute prosecutions in connection with these riotous demonstrations, as would have been the case if they had occurred on the South of Ireland.

I think I am entitled to an answer.

No prosecutions have been instituted by the police.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consent to the appointment of a Select Committee of the House to consider the clauses which appear in so many private Bills this Session authorising municipalities to enter into trading enterprises, and the resolution of the various Chambers of Commerce or the subject.

In answer to the honourable Member, I have to say the important question he refers to is one deserving further investigation, and we think a proper method of investigation would be by t joint Committee of the two Houses.

Will the Government take steps to appoint the Committee at an early date and will the reference be wide enough to include the whole subject?

We shall proceed at once to appoint the Committee, and no doubt tin reference will be sufficiently wide to include all the subjects referred to in my honourable Friend's Question.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will either propose the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the various Measures before the House for making better provision for the aged poor, or arrange for those Measures to be referred to the Committee appointed to deal with the Cottage Homes Bill?

I beg at the same time to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Her Majesty's Government will permit the terms of reference to the Committee to be appointed to deal with the Cottage Homes Bill to be drawn in terms sufficiently wide to cover an inquiry into the whole question of the Poor Laws and of their administration, especially with regard to the aged poor?

I do not think the reference to the Committee which is about to be appointed to deal with the Bill that passed its Second Reading on Wednesday week should be so wide as to include everything connected with the Poor Law. But I think it ought to be wide enough to deal with the question of the condition of the aged poor under our present Poor Law system, and if any other Bills dealing with the condition of the aged poor should pass the Second Reading in the course of the Session I think it would be desirable and convenient that they should be referred to the same Committee.

Does that answer refer to Bills proposing old age pensions?

I never heard of any Bill proposing old age pensions which did not deal with the condition of the aged poor.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can explain why, whilst Counsel being Members of this House are not allowed to appear before Committees of this House or to receive a, fee or reward, it is permissible for solicitors of the High Court of Jus- tice being Members of this House to promote Bills and receive fees for so doing by being a member of a firm of solicitors or Parliamentary agents practising in either House of Parliament?

I think the practice referred to by my honourable Friend is not permissible.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, as "Lewisham" does not appear in the alphabetical list of areas at present under the administration of Vestries known as "A Vestries" which are to be scheduled in the London Government Bill, and that "Lewisham" in fact is not one of the "A Vestries" but a district board, whether it is "Newington," the borough mentioned in the Report of the Royal Commission of 1896 as ripe for municipal government, with a population of over 120,000, and a rateable value of more than £500,000, which it is intended to include in the Bill and not "Lewisham"?

The parish of Lewisham is included among those parishes in the London Government Bill which will be constituted boroughs, while the district of Newington is not so included.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the repeated expressions of opinion by the Central and Associated Chambers of Agriculture, British Dairy Farmers' Association, and many other representative bodies, to the effect that the questions relating to tuberculosis should be dealt with by the State in legislation for the whole country, Her Majesty's Government will introduce a Bill or Bills to meet this desire, and secure uniform administration throughout the United Kingdom?

The Government are not at present prepared to propose legislation on this subject.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been drawn to a memorial adopted by the English Church Union, which body includes numerous clergymen of the Church of Engand; whether he is aware that such memorial declares that the signatories deny the right of the Crown or of Parliament to determine the doctrine, the discipline, and the ceremonial of the Church of England; and whether, having regard to the course of conduct announced in the memorial, he will confer with the Lord Chancellor with a view of guarding against any benefice being conferred on any clergyman known to be a member of the English. Church Union?

My attention has been called to the memorial in question. As far as I am concerned, and I believe I can speak for the Lord Chancellor also, I should not recommend any clergyman to a benefice unless I was convinced that he was prepared loyally to obey his Bishop.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Lord Kitchener will be invited to furnish a Report of the circumstances under which orders were given for the destruction of the tomb of the Mahdi and how the mutilation of his body occurred; and whether this Report will be printed and circulated among Members of the House of Commons before the introduction of the Kitchener Bill?

Lord Cromer has been asked to report on the circumstances of the case, and no doubt he will refer to Lord Kitchener.

Are we not to have Lord Kitchener's report too?

Will not the right honourable Gentleman, with his usual courtesy, answer?

I have not received from Lord Cromer the information which I have asked for, and, until have received it, how is it possible for me to say?

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury when the Second Reading of the Sale of Food and Drugs Bill will be taken?

In answering this question, perhaps it would be convenient for me to state the general business for the immediate future. We take, as the House is aware, the Army Estimates tonight, and we will also take them tomorrow. On Monday the first order will be the Telephone Bill, introduced by my right honourable Friend the Secretary to the Treasury. As it is a money Bill, it will have to be introduced by Resolution. The second order will be the Food and Drugs Bill, and the third order will be the Colonial Loans Fund Bill. On Thursday next I hope my right honourable Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty will be able to make his statement on naval matters to the House, but I do not like to give an absolute pledge on that subject as yet.

On behalf of the honourable Member for North Louth, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland how much was advanced by the Irish Land Commission under the Arrears of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1882, section 16 (tenancies over £30 to £50 valuation) upon loan at £5 per cent. per annum; how much of that has been repaid, and what capital sum is duo; and for how many tenants were advances made; how many of the tenants and landlords to whom such advances or payments were made are now living in occupation or ownership of the lands out of which the rent charges are payable; whether the Land Commission would recommend that such rent charges should be extinguished or abated or compounded; and whether they would recommend a reduction in the rate of £5 per cent, for repayment should be made?

The amount advanced under the Arrears of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1882, section 16, was £27,010. The amount repaid to date is £9,000, and the capital amount outstanding is £18,010. Advances were made to 969 tenants. Payments continue to be made in the names of 814 of the tenants to whom advances were originally made. Payments are made in 66 cases in the names of the landlords for advances for which the tenants in such cases were primarily liable. In the remaining 89 cases the instalments are paid in the names of persons other than the tenants to whom the advances were made, or of the landlords in such cases.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, at Levenshulme, near Manchester, out of a, number of parents who applied for free places, 11 parents applying in respect of 16 children in or above Standard II. have been directed by the Department to send their children to St. Mary's Roman Catholic Church; whether the whole of these parents are Protestants; whether the population of Levenshulme is now 10,500, and the accommodation required on the one-sixth scale would be 1,700, while the actual accommodation is only about 1,100 places; and why the Department, having regard both to the deficiency of accommodation, and to the fact that Protestant parents are seeking free places for their children, has not used its power under section 3 of the Education Act, 1891, to provide sufficient accommodation and suitable free places for the children of Protestant parents?

The applications for free places were sent in the ordinary course to the School Attendance Committee. A schedule was, as usual, sent by them to the Department, giving the names of the applicants and the schools at which there were free places to be obtained. The Department sent the information received in the ordinary course to the applicants without inquiry as to their religious tenets or the denominations to which the schools indicated belonged. The number of school places in Levenshulme is now 1,137. A new school for 200 children was sanctioned last November. The accommodation will then be sufficient. The Committee of Council has no such power under section 5 of the Elementary Education Act, 1891, as the honourable Member supposes.

May I ask whether the 5th section of the Act of 1891 did not impose a duty on the Department to provide?

There is no deficiency in the opinion of the Committee of Council.

I shall raise this Question on the Estimates.

Before moving that the Speaker do now leave the Chair, I have decided to make the general statement on the Army policy of the Government, which is sometimes made upon that Motion, and sometimes upon the Vote for men. I do this in the hope that it may prove convenient to honourable Members to know, before they proceeded to criticism, exactly what progress has been made with the programme explained last year to this House by my right honourable Friend the present Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in a memorable speech. I may perhaps remind honourable Members that by taking this course I do not in any way restrict the scope of discussion upon the Vote for men when we come to it. I shall also attempt to show what modifications—and they are very slight—in that programme have been sanctioned by my noble Friend the Secretary,' of State for War, and the additions to it. I may say at once that we propose no heroic changes in that programme. The reforms of 1897 and of 1898 are to have a fair trial, so that the task before me is a modest one, but one which I cannot hope to accomplish unless the House gives me a double measure of indulgence. My task is merely to point out how far we have got in shaping those changes then accepted towards the ends which were then in view. And, Mr. Speaker, unless we keep those ends constantly in view, it is well-nigh impossible to make a defence, or even an explanation, of our Army policy and system intelligible. There are features in our system which seem, on the face of them, open to attack. Some of our critics insist upon the youth of our men in our home battalions; the drafting of men out of one unit into another; upon the obscuring, in certain cases, of some ancient traditions; or, again, perhaps, upon the reduction of some of our six-gun batteries to four-gun batteries. Now, all these features, if considered in themselves, and apart from the purposes for which the whole of our forces are raised, may seem somewhat irrational. But that would seem true of the features of any human contrivance if you did not take into account, the purpose which it was contrived to effect. I should despair of justifying the shape of a corkscrew to the man who had never seen a bottle. The British Army is raised under certain limitations to effect certain purposes. The limitations are that our Army must be a voluntary Army, and that it must not be extravagantly dear. The purposes are four in number. They have been recited before, but I must ask leave of the House to name them once again in the order, perhaps, not of their import- ance, but of their imminence and their likelihood. In the first place, we are bound to provide a British Army for India, which, since India pays for it, must be up to the standard of efficiency for which she contracts. In the second place, we are bound to provide garrisons for some of our Colonies, for some foreign States that we happen to occupy for our coaling stations and our naval bases. In the third place, we must have at our command a small force to dispatch whenever a small war arises out of the impact of our civilisation with barbarism. And, lastly, in the fourth place, we must be ready against the chances of a great war involving the risk of invasion. This last purpose, unlike the others, is a remote—I hope and believe a very remote—contingency, and yet it is a contingency so dire that our Army, framed in the first place to discharge the three normal and, I might almost say, annual purposes for which it exists, must also be susceptible of adaptation to meet even that dire contingency should it at any time arise. So that we must have a Field Army adequate for home defence, and, when the command of the sea has been assured, adequate also to deliver a counter attack. Sir, I propose to take the three arms—Artillery, Cavalry, and Infantry—and the other corps which are necessary to keep those three in the field, and to try to show how far they may be fitted to discharge their fourfold object. And, first, Sir, I will take the Artillery. I think it should have the post of honour this afternoon, because it seems probable that it will bear the brunt of the attack. The right honourable Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean, quite in accordance with the most modern theory of warfare, of which he is a past master, is prepared to begin this engagement with an Artillery duel. Now, taking our Artillery, we provide for India 11 batteries of Horse Artillery, 42 batteries of Field Artillery, eight batteries of Mountain Artillery, and 27 companies of Garrison Artillery. We provide for our Colonies four batteries of Field Artillery, one battery of Mountain Artillery, and 37 companies of Garrison Artillery. Now, Sir, I have no reason to believe that more Artillery units are required for these two purposes in India and the Colonies, except in the case of Garrison Artillery. But to meet that need, in the programme of 1897, an increase of the establishment was sanctioned of 11 companies of Garrison Artillery. Eight of those companies have already been raised, and upon the Estimates now put before the House we hope to raise and complete the other three companies of Garrison Artillery. Nor is it urged, so far as I know, that we have not sufficient Artillery at our command for any small war. But in the case of home defence it is otherwise. I know that some honourable Members of this House are not quite easy in their minds on that point. For home defence we aim at having a Field Army composed of three Army Corps and four Cavalry Brigades. Taking the Horse Artillery first, each of these four Cavalry brigades requires one battery of Horse Artillery, and each Army Corps two batteries, making 10 batteries of Horse Artillery in all. We have 10 batteries of Horse Artillery in this country, and a depot. Turning to the Field Artillery, which, I believe, excites greater anxiety in the minds of some honourable Members of this House, each Army Corps until quite recently was held only to need 15 batteries of Field Artillery, making 15 batteries in all for the Field Army, which we are bound to keep to guard against the risk of invasion. We have 41 batteries in all of Field Artillery in the country, besides three batteries of howitzers and two depots. But I ought to tell the House that we are no longer advised that 15 batteries of Field Artillery are enough for an Army Corps) we are advised that 18 batteries are needed, which would make 54 batteries in all for the Field Army, of which I have spoken. We have 44 batteries now, and when the 10 new batteries remaining out of the 15 sanctioned by this House in the programme explained by my right honourable Friend are completed, as they will be, we expect, in two years' time, we shall have 54 batteries. We are raising them at the rate of five in each year, and I am informed by those who are in a position to know, that it is impossible to raise them any faster. But, Sir, although, as I have shown, we have the units for this purpose, I know it is suggested in some quarters that our programme for home defence in respect of Field Artillery is illusory and fictitious; it is said that we have not enough trained horses, and, secondly, that we have nut enough trained men in service batteries at home. I will take the question of the horses first. No doubt it is true that there were on the 1st of January this year 1,500 fewer trained horses in the Artillery than there were upon the 1st of January in 1879. Well, that is quite true, but it is no news. We have deli berately—or, rather, this House and this Government and its predecessors have deliberately—on the advice of military experts, reduced the establishment for horses in the Artillery by 1,600; so that the fact that there are 1,500 fewer now than then is precisely the fact that you would expect. But that, of course, does not dispose of the question whether that establishment is sufficient, but it does dispose of the impression which I think lurks in some minds that there has been some hocus-pocus over this business, and that we are pretending that we have more horses than we really possess. The fact is that we have 100 more than in our scheme on paper we claim to have. Well, I have gone over this ground, and have shown that in two years we shall have as many batteries of Field Artillery as are necessary for our Field Army and our three Army Corps. But now arises the question—Are there enough horses in each of these batteries? Well, Sir, among the changes authorised from time to time by this House, and which are far too complicated to enter upon in detail, it will suffice to say that the upshot of them was the reduction of the establishment by 1,500 horses, and one change was made in 1878ߝ79, namely, a reduction of 700 in the number of waggon horses. Now, that has not been a gradual reduction, but it was done at one fell swoop in 1879ߝ80. If the right honourable Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean had taken the end of the year 1879 instead of the beginning of it, he would have found the Field Artillery had only two more horses in each four-gun battery than they have now. It is no new discovery, but it is a part of the policy pursued during the last 20 years. Well, Sir, upon this question of waggon horses a new factor has come into the problem be the introduction of what are called quick firing guns. These quick-firing guns expend a great deal more ammunition than those which they are about to supersede, and the whole question of waggon horses is thereby thrown back into an experimental stage. Our military advisers, therefore, have to ascertain how much ammunition is needed behind the firing line, and they have also to ascertain what new system of disposition and distribution of reserve may be necessary, for they are of the opinion that some new plan of distribution will be necessary. They are now working at that problem, and until they have arrived at their conclusions it is quite impossible to put any accurate figures before the House; but there is no risk or danger, for it is the easiest thing in the world to lay our hands upon horses at the present time. We have now something more than 14,500 horses marked down which we could buy tomorrow if war broke out. It is not thought necessary, by those who are able to advise us, that we should keep those horses in the ranks in time of peace. Sir, there is another of these changes to which I must refer, namely, the introduction of the four-gun battery system; the introduction of lower establishment batteries with four guns instead of with six guns, and in dealing with that I should like to deal not only with the question of trained horses, but at the same time with the question of trained men. It is said that we have not enough trained horses for our service batteries, and also that we have not enough trained men, and that our service batteries have become mere training schools from which to draw men for other batteries abroad. Well, this institution of four-gun batteries is simply an administrative device and nothing more. It is a very good illustration of the system by which we are able to make the number of men voted by Parliament subserve the two classes of purposes for which the Army is raised, to which I referred a few moments ago—namely, that of finding drafts to meet the annual normal demands of India and the Colonies, and also of having a framework for the three Army Corps in the event of a great war involving the risk of invasion. I am quite content to take my stand upon this illustration of our system, namely, the reduction of batteries from six-gun to four-gun establishments. It is easier to train a, number of men with batteries on this establishment.

Why?

I will come to that in a moment. Although it is not universally, it is generally held that drafts can be better trained with the service batteries at home than they can be in the depôt. Some, I know, think the contrary, but that is the general view, and it is the settled and matured conviction of our military advisers at the War Office. Then I take the other purpose for which our Army is raised, namely, home defence; and in order to make out my case and show that there is nothing wrong with this four-gun system, I will ask the House to take an imaginary case of the most crucial and, let me add, of the most improbable character. I ask the House to suppose that all the drafts trained with those batteries at home have gone to India in the trooping season, and that they have gone without the least suspicion in any man's mind that war was going to break out. Of course, if there were any such suspicion that we were on the eve of a great war, drafts would be kept at home, and the time-expired men in India; but assume that there was no suspicion of war aroused, and no danger anticipated, and then assume that it does break out just at that most unfavourable moment, it would find us not only with all the men who are trained to perform their special function of laying guns, but it would find us with more than 100 non-commissioned officers and men in each of these four-gun field batteries, so that only 70 men from the Reservists in addition would be required in each battery to bring up the first line to war strength. That is the present position, and, of course, it will be materially improved when in a few years' time, with 10 additional batteries, the drafts from each will be less than at present; less than 30 from each battery. Now, with regard to horses, these four-gun batteries have 58 horses in all, of which 38 are trained to draw the guns; that is to say, there are enough horses to draw not four guns, but six guns, and two to spare. For the waggons we count upon the 14,500 registered horses. Even if it were thought desirable to have more than 58 horses with each of these lower establishment batteries, I do not think it would be possible to get the men to train them while we are increasing the establishment—at least, that is the opinion of our military ad- visers. One would think, from the criticisms made, that this four-gun system is peculiar to this country, but that is not so. In Germany 221 batteries out of 494 are also four-gun batteries. But I think we must agree that a Continental nation must, on the one hand, have its Army for home defence in a much more advanced state of preparation than is necessary in this country; and, on the other hand, they have not to find drafts of troops for an Army abroad. So that in our case there are more reasons for and fewer against adopting the four-gun system in our batteries. I think it is hardly necessary for me to remind the House that these four-gun batteries have their other two guns in existence, and that facilities are given them to exercise their horses with six guns. Each battery is exercised in turn at Okehampton in drill with its six guns. Having said so much in favour of the four-gun system, I will now ask the House to consider the alternative—namely, instead of training our drafts with lower establishment batteries, we were to send them all to the depôts. But in order to find the drafts for India alone it would be necessary to have 1,500 men at the depôt at Woolwich, men who, we are told, would be imperfectly trained for that purpose, and men who would find no place in the scheme for home defence. The depôt does not exist only for India, but it exists to give preliminary drill and training in gymnastics to all the recruits for the whole of the artillery, both for home and foreign service. Well, Sir, we had nearly 3,000 recruits for Field Artillery during last year, and the accommodation at Woolwich did not suffice for that number; 900 recruits had to join the batteries direct because there was not room for them at Woolwich. The practical question is, not whether we should abandon the present system for one involving a far larger depot, but whether it may not be necessary to extend the Woolwich depôt to meet the requirements of the system now in force. I think I ought to apologise to the House for having gone into this question at such length. My excuse, however, must be that while our critics consider this a very weak point in the system now in force, we, on the other hand, think it a very good illustration of the manner in which our system enables us to fulfil our annual obligations, and at the same time to provide the framework of three Army Corps for home defence. Before leaving the subject of the Artillery, I may tell the House that we propose to divide the mounted from the dismounted branch of this arm of the Service. The scheme has been approved, and is being worked out in detail. I come now to the Cavalry. Again pursuing the same order, during the year we have to find nine Cavalry regiments of the Line for India, and for Africa we have now to find three Cavalry regiments, and so far as I know we are not required to find more. But for our Field Army which we have to provide in order to guard against the risk of invasion, we have to find four Cavalry brigades of three regiments each, and two regiments for each of the three Army Corps. That would mean 12 Cavalry regiments for the four Brigades and six for the three Army Corps, making 18 regiments in all. Well, Sir, towards that at home we have 16 Cavalry regiments of the Line, and we can count upon one regiment composed out of three regiments of Household troops, making 17 in all. I am ready to admit that we fall short by one of our ideal, namely, to have 18 regiments, but that ideal is a very high one, of having four independent Cavalry brigades to the three Army Corps, and it amply covers all that we have pledged ourselves to effect, namely, to have enough Cavalry for two Army Corps which could be put on board ship to be sent abroad. In the case of the Cavalry, as in the case of the Artillery, it is the mature opinion of our military advisers that drafts are, better trained with regiments that at depôts, and we adhere to that principle all the more firmly because, having now 12 regiments of Cavalry abroad instead of nine, which used to be the number, we should have, I suppose, quite 1,500 recruits imperfectly trained for foreign service at the depôts, and, as in the case of the Artillery, finding no place in the scheme for home defence. But although adhering to that principle, we recognise that there are two difficulties in its application to Cavalry which do not exist to the same extent in its application to Artillery. In the first place, there is but one regiment of Royal Artillery, but there are 28 regiments of Cavalry of the Line, each with its own traditions of a glorious past; and in the second place, for "shock action" it is held that Reservists are not sufficiently trained. It is held that all the men and all the horses in a regiment which might at very short notice be called upon to take part in war as an integral unit should be trained by that regiment in times of peace. I think I should only weary the House if I went into the details of the general scheme, therefore I will simply give the upshot of it, which I hope will give to honourable Members all the information they seek. The upshot of it is this, that the eight Cavalry regiments on the higher establishment, which, unfortunately, last year were in some cases called upon to provide by volunteering, and even by compulsion, large numbers of men in drafts for India, are next year not to be required to provide any men either by volunteering or compulsion. These eight Cavalry regiments on the higher establishment to which we have to look in case of emergency are to have complete immunity in this respect in the future. We have to provide drafts for the 12 regiments abroad, say about 1,200 men. The existing three depôts for the three regiments in Africa will be maintained, and a fourth depôt will be added to meet an exceptional but temporary strain in India, which will be maintained so long as that exceptional strain continues to exist. For the balance of drafts we shall look to the eight regiments upon the lower establishment, and we shall enable them to train those men with less difficulty than heretofore. Honourable Members will recollect that this was announced in the memorandum of the Secretary of State for War, that we are adding 60 men and 20 horses to each one of these new regiments on the lower establishment. The only other step that we take in order to ease the burden which is imposed on the Cavalry is that the wish expressed by any man upon enlistment to serve in any particular regiment when his training has been completed will be gratified whenever that is possible. I hope that these modifications will go some way towards redressing the grievances from which some Cavalry regiments have certainly suffered during the past year; but they will not go the whole of the way in all cases. We must, however, face the facts. The new and additional burdens of empire must place new and additional burdens upon the British Army, and the shortening of the period between the apprehension of war and the actual shock of arms, precluding, as it does, the idea of leisurely preparation, has brought into being a new order of things, so that some regiments have now to put up with in each year on a small scale what in the old days some regiments had to put up with now and then on a large scale. Even to meet lesser emergencies than war, it is a mistake to suppose that there ever was a golden age for cavalry in which each regiment was able to depend upon itself and be ready to go abroad without drawing upon other regiments. I have looked up the historical records of some of these regiments from official documents, and I find that one Cavalry regiment, although it had been augmented in preparation for taking its turn in India in the year 1822, when it arrived in India took over 259 men from one of the other regiments there, and 175 from another regiment, or 434 men in all. Well, Sir, that regiment, so transmogrified, was kept in India for 24 years, and covered itself with glory during that time, and yet, when it returned, it was called upon to give up 176 men to another regiment, and it came home with only seven officers and 259 men. It picked up 12 officers and 79 men at the depot, but next year its establishment was reduced, and nine of its officers were forced to go upon half-pay. Well, that was the kind of thing that went on at the beginning of the century merely over going to India and returning, but I am glad to say that the Cavalry has not to put up with anything of that kind now. Now, under the new system, which comes in for a good deal of abuse occasionally, we can keep 12 Cavalry regiments abroad, and we can put 17 Cavalry regiments into the field at home, at the cost of asking eight Cavalry regiments out of 31 to train and supply 100 men each for India. I do not mind saying that, for my own part, I wish we could avoid even that necessity. I yield to no honourable and gallant Member of this House in my admiration for the miracles that are wrought by the esprit de corps which turns the loafer into a hero and enables boys in their teens to lead men whom some of us would consider unruly citizens. But I do not see how we can avoid that necessity, unless we are prepared to take one of two courses—either to curtail our Empire, or else to ask the taxpayers of this country for an insurance out of all proportion to the remoteness of the risk of invasion. Sir, I come now to the infantry. We have to supply India with 52 battalions of Infantry, and we supply the Colonies with 29 Line battalions and one battalion of Guards, which makes, in all, 82 battalions of Infantry abroad. Now, we should have in difficulty in providing for a small war except, perhaps, in the matter of clothing. In times past it has been difficult to get the clothing suited to the tropical climate ready on the spur of the moment, when we wished to dispatch a force to such a climate; therefore, we are asking in these Estimates for £20,000, so that clothing suitable for tropical climates shall be ready for a small force on the same principle as we keep mobilisation clothing ready at a moment's notice to be distributed at its proper centres. Then, at home, for the field Army of three Army Corps we should require 75 battalions of Infantry—25 for each. We have at home seven battalions of Guards and 64 Line battalions, or 71 in all, so that we are apparently short by four battalions of the ideal at which we aim. But, Sir, the House, last year and in 1897, authorised an increase of our Army by nine battalions. Five of these new battalions have been raised, and we do not anticipate any difficulty in raising the other four in a very short period of time; so that, in a very short time, with those additional four battalions, our 71 will have become 75, which is the figure at which we aim for home defence. In the meanwhile, we are able to improvise four battalions, which, I am fully persuaded, will render a very good account of themselves. For each of the four in that case we should take the double depôt of a regiment with both battalions abroad, the Reservists of the two battalions, and the affiliated Militia. In the case of the Infantry, particularly bearing in mind the speech of my right honourable Friend, which he delivered last year, I feel that there is no occasion for me to labour the argument in favour of drafting from units instead of keeping all our drafts for India and the Colonies at the depots. We have 81 Line battalions abroad, each of them requiring an average draft of 160 men in a year, and that would mean 13,000 men, in round numbers; but since we cannot send men to India until they are 20 years of age, and since we must allow for waste, the depot system would mean that we should have to keep a very much higher number to feed our Army abroad, who would have no place in the scheme for home defence. I think my right honourable Friend put it at 30,000 men in his speech last year. In the case of Infantry, as in the case of Cavalry and Artillery, we must use the same material for our normal annual task of finding drafts for abroad, and for providing against the remote contingency of invasion. It is an absolute necessity; but, recognising that necessity—I can almost say that the Army now recognises it also—we are not, therefore, blind to the inestimable value of regimental tradition. When the two battalions now forming a regiment were once two separate regiments, we are always ready, wherever it is possible, without introducing anything prejudicial to this system, to do anything to save and preserve every symbol of the glorious past of any regiment; we are always ready to do so. Something was done a short time ago in respect of regimental badges in every case where the two regiments have been able to agree. The case of facings, however, is a more difficult one; we have to consider questions of manufacture and supply, and also the question whether, by granting the facings asked for by one regiment, we might not be offending another; but I may say that if all the battalions of one regiment made united representations, asking for facings once worn, the Secretary of State would be willing to consider such an application on its merits. Our military advisers do not believe that any feeling of the kind exists, and no representations have reached us from the Army. But, in any case, if such a concession were given it would only apply to the tunics and not to the frock, which would be the garment worn on mobilisation, because there it is absolutely essential that we should preserve the existing elasticity. Before I leave the question of men serving with the colours I must, in view of the Estimates which we have to submit, say a word or two about our Colonial forces. As the House is probably aware, there are of our coloured Colonial forces officered by white officers over 21,000 men who are not under the War Office, but who are under the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office. We have now under the War Office exactly 6,565 men. That includes the 3rd Battalion West India, Regiment which was raised upon the programme of 1897, and we are now raising and asking for funds in this Estimate to raise a West African regiment, a Central African regiment, and a. Chinese regiment. That will mean an addition of 3,258 men, which will give us a total of 9,823 men under the War Office, and which will bring up the total of our coloured regiments to about 31,000 men. That is not a very large figure—certainly not large enough, in my humble opinion, to justify the gloomy forebodings indulged in the other day by the right honourable Gentleman the Member for Montrose Burghs. I do not think that anyone will be able to see any sign of our decline and fall in the fact that we have 31,000 native troops as against 140,000 British troops, without counting the Reserve, the Militia, and Volunteers. In this comparison, of course, I leave out India, because we may assume that the proportion of British to native forces in India is all that we may require. I come now to the Reserve, the Militia, and the Volunteers. With regard to these forces, I feel that I need add very little to the Memorandum of my noble Friend, and to the very interesting' report of General Kelly-Kenny. The first-class Army Reserve on the 1st of January of this year stood at 78,798. It was lowered, as the House may know, because of re-transfers from the Reserve to the Line amounting to 4,488, but that lowering was a temporary and, I believe, a perfectly safe expedient, because we are able to reckon that the first-class Army Reserve will, in the course of this year, amount to the total of 83,000 men. I ought to say a word about the new Section A of the Reserve, which formed part of the programme of last year. The House knows that this class of Army Reservists are given 1s. a day, and that they are liable to be called out whenever warlike operations are in preparation or in progress. The number of men who have taken that additional pay and undertaken that additional obligation was, on the 1st of January, 1,360, and I may say that the figures are increasing; on the 1st of February the number had risen from 1,360 to" 1,750, so that I really think there is very little doubt that we shall reach, with little difficulty, the Limit proposed—namely, 5,000. Well, Sir, I think I will now pass to the Militia, and I cannot disguise the fact that that ancient and most useful force does suffer by being called upon to perform in this country a good deal of work which is done by the Reserves in Continental Armies. There are, in the first place, 30,000 Militiamen in the Militia Reserve, who, to all intents and purposes, are a part of the Army Reserve, and cannot be reckoned both in the Militia and in the Army Reserve. To that we must add the men who undertake the new obligations under the Act passed last year—the men whose obligations will really be heavier than the obligations of the men in the first-class Army Reserve, because they can be called out more frequently and upon lesser occasions, so to speak, than even the men in the first-class Army Reserve. I do not think it is difficult to defend all these devices; on the contrary, I think the fact is, that we must have more elasticity now than was necessary in the old days, when you had months to think it over before you determined whether you would go to war or not. We have to meet nowadays a greater number of contingencies. It is quite possible that at the time last year, when we had an expedition up the Nile and were occupying Crete, if some other burden of a like character had been cast upon our hands in some other part of the world we should have needed more Reservists, either from the first-class Army Reserve or the Militia, in order to go through with these many tasks which fell upon us. But under the old rule you could not get a man without a Royal, Proclamation and the calling of both Houses of Parliament together within 10 days; so that these devices are necessary in order that we may do by voluntary contract with the men what otherwise would have to be clone compulsorily by Royal Proclamation. The strength of the Militia on the last day of last year, that is, on the 31st of December, was 103,647. That shows a nett decrease of 1,884. But that decrease is not due to any slackness in recruiting; on the contrary, 40,108 joined the Militia last year. Nor is it mainly due to discharges or absenteeism. It is chiefly due to the fact that 15,167 men passed from the Militia into the Line. I do not know whether it will console some honourable and gallant Members behind me when I say that this evil, if it be an evil, of draining the Militia to feed the Army was also common in the early part of the century. Mr. Pitt linked Militia battalions to regiments of the Line, and in the year 1807ߝ8 27,000 Militia passed out of that force into the Regular Army. We have now to put up every year with burdens which, under earlier conditions, had to be borne occasionally on a much larger scale. But that is all the more reason for making the Militia efficient and attractive. In this year's Estimates we are asking for an increase of £41,200 for the British Militia: that excludes a small sum for the Militia Artillery in Bermuda. Of this sum £25,400 will be needed for the new section of Militiamen who are prepared to come out when called upon. The sum of £3,050 has been allocated to giving non-commissioned officers of Militia regiments extra training with regular troops, and £9,000 is taken to give a boon which has long been asked for, namely, field caps for the Militia. And since we know that officers in the Militia have very heavy calls made upon their private means, we set down a small sum of £3,750 to assist officers of corps in maintaining the regimental band. I come now to the Volunteer establishment which, this year, is 264,833, showing an increase of 870. Now first of all as to rifle ranges. I know that on this question a good deal of anxiety exists. Owing to the introduction of the Lee-Metford rifle, as many honourable Members are aware, a good many ranges have been closed. But after all, they are not in such a bad way as I sometimes hear they are. I have been going into the figures, and I find that whereas on the 1st of April, 1894, before the introduction of the new rifle, the Volunteers and Yeomanry had 1,172 ranges: now 667 ranges have been approved, and there are still 350 ranges which are being inspected, of which a fair proportion, in all probability, will pass muster. There would be very great difficulty in the Government's providing sums directly for the purchase of Volunteer ranges. We have always held that Volunteer regiments should—and ecrtainly they have shown great willingness to do so—provide ranges for themselves; but in order to assist them, some changes have been introduced into the travelling allowances for musketry, so that corps living at greater distances than 12 miles from a range may be able to reach it at less cost than was the case before. I ought, perhaps, to remind the House that, under the Loan Act of 1897, we are taking half a million of money to construct 20 new ranges, to which, of course, Volunteers will have every facility of access. We have done a little to assist the officers of Militia regiments, but the tax on the pockets of Volunteer officers, as well as Militia officers, is also very great, and we provide £3,000 to assist them in maintaining their outfit, and £2,000 to Volunteer officers whilst they are attending schools of instruction in the Regular Army. We also put down £5,000 to make a beginning in supplying Volunteer corps with regimental transport. The principle is this: the calculation is based on the scale of three waggons for every 110 men—that is known as the "transport unit." We undertake to pay a grant of £1 for each waggon shown and produced and kept in camp during eight days by any corps which shows a minimum of three waggons, and contracts to supply a maximum of waggons calculated on that scale on mobilisation. Of course, any corps that shows more than three waggons will get a grant up to the maximum limit based upon that scale, that is, three waggons to every 110 men. This brings me now to the general question of transport. Our Field Army would be useless unless it could move. For the three Army Corps composing the Field Army, it is calculated that, in round numbers, we need about 12,000 men in the Army Service Corps. But at this moment, excluding Reservists, we have 3,302 Army Service Corps men at home, so that we are asking in these Estimates for an increase in the Army Service Corps of 40 officers and 1,000 men, and we are putting down this year £34,000, which will enable us to raise half that force. I should like to remove a misconception which lurks in some minds as to the lessons to be learned from the manœuvres. The problem which we had to solve was to put two Army Corps in the field without calling out our Reservists and our registered horses, neither of which could be used without a Royal Proclamation in case of war. But with the Reservists of the Army Service Corps we have now enough men for the first line of two Army Corps in the field. We have 14,500 registered horses, and we have—which I think is sometimes forgotten—all the waggons and equipment for the mobilisation of two Army Corps. The only reason why we did not make use of them was, in the first place, the wear and tear of the mobilisation equipment; and, in the second place, if you take it away from mobilisation centres it will take some weeks or months to redistribute it again, and during the whole of that time you will not be ready for mobilisation. I have endeavoured to show that the British Army, under the present system, is in a fair way to effect the purposes for which it is raised. But everything turns upon recruiting. Further progress will be impossible unless the people of this country respond to the call made upon them. But I think that they are beginning to respond. If any arm has this year been more pressed by reason of the burdens cast upon it than another it is the Cavalry; yet whereas in 1895, before any of the changes made in the system had been introduced, we got 2,387 recruits, in 1897 we obtained 2,426, and last year 3,778 recruits. The total number of British recruits—I am leaving out the recruits of the Clolonial forces—last year was 38,418, as against 27,809 in the year 1896. The net gain to the Army last year, including Reservists and deserters rejoining, was 9,980 men.

Can the right honourable Gentleman give us the total number of recruits for the Colonies?

I do not think I could give that information now, but I will look it up. There is, up to the present, no sign of the flood abating. The figures in General Kelly-Kenny's report go down as far as the end of last year, but in January last, which was not included in that report, the figures show that it has been a "bumper" month. Excluding 1870, when, probably owing to the Franco-German war, recruits flocked into the Army at the prospects of operations being commenced, last January is the highest total for recruiting of which we have any record at all. No less than 4,854 recruits joined in January last, and if I add to this total the deserters rejoining, and the Reservists, the number was 5,213, making a net gain to the Army for one month of 1,284 men. If anything like that is kept up in the succeeding months, we can accomplish the increase which the House has sanctioned without any difficulty at all. But this number of 38,418 recruits which we are accepting does not, however, give by any means the full measure of the country's response to our demands. I am sorry to say that, of the recruits who presented themselves, 35 per cent, were rejected on medical grounds. I think that is rather an alarming figure. It may give us just cause for apprehension, not only in respect of the welfare of the Army, but of the welfare of the people themselves. A great many of these rejections were due to bad teeth, although more were rejected because they lacked general development. It does occur to me that, in schools largely supported out of the public funds, it might not be impossible to get the children to take some elementary precautions to preserve their teeth, and it might also be a good thing to introduce into the schools that system of physical drill advocated by Colonel Fox, which has done so much for the recruits of the British Army. What it has done for the recruits may be gathered from the large percentage of recruits who were under standard, who were called "specials," but who ceased to be "specials," and who attained the standard within a very short time. This is mainly due to these exercises. Of those recruits, re-measured in January, who had joined since October, and that includes some who may have joined within a week, 43 per cent, had reached the standard; and of the "specials" who joined before the 30th June, 73 per cent, had reached the standard. Of the "specials" who had joined before 1895, no less than 90 per cent, had reached the standard, and I may tell the House that some of those "specials" are now, on account of their abnormal muscular development, teaching gymnastics in our gymnasia. But we must discount a little on the score of recruiting in respect of these "specials," and we must also discount in respect of the 4,488 Army Reservists who rejoined the colours. But these figures of the Army Reservists who have rejoined the colours throw a much needed light on the question of civilian employment for the men who leave the Army. Out of 3,370 Infantry Reservists who rejoined up to October, 2,596 stated that they were in employment at that time; and, of course, we may assume that those who came back to the colours were those who were in straitened circumstances. This, I think, suggests two things—in the first place, it is obvious that our men do find employment on leaving the colours; and it shows, in the second place, that many men who have tried both a military and civilian life find that they prefer a military life, and I must say that I wish we could persuade more people to try the experiment. There are certain classes in this country who seem to hold back from trying what a military life is like. The great bulk of our recruits are men who, so to speak, come from the plough. Of course, they are none the worse for that; their predecessors of a like condition won the battle of Waterloo. But I must believe that a greater number of those pursuing, or wishing to pursue, other avocations, and belonging to other classes, would do well to consider whether they would not be benefited by seven years of constant employment, sanitary lodgings, wholesome food, and opportunities for education, and for obtaining a certain physical and mental alacrity which is of the greatest advantage later on in the struggle for life. Now I think I may claim that some of the recent reforms are entitled to some of the credit for this increase in recruiting, particularly the messing allowance. I think we may take this result to show that the Army is now more popular than it was before, and that we may be encouraged to proceed along the same lines. This year we are asking in the Estimates for £11,400 in order to give ankle-boots to Cavalry soldiers. At present, the Cavalry soldier is given only one pair of ankle-boots, and he is expected to pro- vide himself with boots during the whole period of his service. We are also asking for £5,200 in order to give the soldiers in the Cavalry and Artillery a frock and an extra pair of serge trousers during the time of their drill, in order that they may, like other Englishmen, change their clothes after exercise, without being out of pocket. We are also asking for £18,500, so that the men, when they return to camp after a day's manœuvres, may take off their dusty boots and slip into easy canvas shoes. These things may seem small, and they are certainly cheap; but everyone who has been in camp knows that they mean a great deal. In this connection I must touch upon a larger matter—I am afraid that I am taxing the patience of the House—which will do move for the comfort of our soldiers and the efficiency of our Army—I mean the provision of better barracks and their location, with a juster regard to the requirements of the training of our troops together. Under the scheme which will be submitted shortly to this House much will, I hope, be done to raise both the standard of decency and comfort in the barracks for our men, and to enable troops to exercise together in large bodies; in infantry divisions, cavalry brigades, and artillery brigade divisions, under the leaders who will command them in time of war. I have just one word more to say. In these Estimates we are asking for £431,000, including an increase of £189,000 on Vote 9, as a first instalment of the money to be spent on arming with modern guns the more important of our military and mercantile ports. This is a matter which we can no longer postpone, and although we ask only for an instalment this year, we shall submit a complete policy based upon the report of a Committee composed of Sir Henry Brackenbury, Sir R. Harrison, and Admiral Beaumont. I thank the House for the very great patience with which it has listened to a long and a dry story. I should be very sorry to adopt a complacent tone in submitting these Army Estimates. Much, I think, has been done in recent years by the soldiers and by the civilians of the War Office, but much remains to do. Still, our Army is numerically stronger now than it has been at any time since 1860. The life of our soldiers is brighter. The op- portunities for training our units, in the formation and under the conditions which will prevail in a great war, are larger. Thanks to the splendid devotion of all ranks of our Regular, Auxiliary, and Colonial forces, I dare to believe that our small voluntary Army is ready to solve the double and difficult problem of keeping the Queen's peace throughout her wide dominions, and of defending our shores.