laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, that in the ease of the following Bills, referred on the first reading thereof, Standing Order No. 62 has been complied with, namely—

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether any of the members of the Committee appointed by the Government to inquire into the administration of the Patriotic Fund are themselves Patriotic Commissioners.

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question, may I ask if there is any precedent, in the constitution of a Committee of this kind, for omitting the name of the hon. Member to whose initiative and investigation the action is due? I refer to my hon. friend the Member for Devonport.

The hon. Gentleman who asks me that question is confusing a Parliamentary Committee with the sort of Committee which I have attempted to frame. I have carefully excluded those who took a prominent public part in the debates on this question. There are friends of mine on this side of the House who took an active part in the debates, and would have been glad to serve, but I thought it would be far better that this Committee should, as far as possible, be outside the controversy, and for that reason I have been glad to obtain the services of so distinguished a Chairman as Lord Justice Henn Collins. With regard to the question on the Paper, the suggestion is that two members have been placed on the Committee who have an interest in keeping unchanged the constitution of the Royal Patriotic Fund. The Lord Mayor is only an ex officio member serving for his year of office, and I believe the only occasion on which he appeared at a meeting of the fund was in order to explain how, under the existing management, the fund was so unpopular that contributions to his fund would not willingly be paid over to the management of the Patriotic Fund. As regards Mr. W. Lidderdale, he is a reformer in this matter, and is by no means wedded to the existing system under which the fund is administered.

Arising out of this answer, may I ask whether it has come to the knowledge of the right hon. Gentleman that there is some dissatification at the constitution of the Committee, as announced by him, felt by some; of the persons interested in the matter. It is in the knowledge of the light hon. Gentleman that a large portion of the funds referred to are invested for the benefit and education of Catholic children? I do not know whether he would permit representations to be made to him as to enlarging the Committee by the addition of other names.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us if he has made any arrangements for filling the place of Lord Justice Henn Collins during the time he is occupied on this Committee, having regard to the fact that the Court of Appeal is quite unable to overtake its work?

I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, having regard to the fact that three members of the body whose actions are impugned are on the Committee, it would not be desirable that one gentleman at least of those associated with the criticism of the fund should also be on the Committee.

I have already explained that the Members who have defended the fund have also been excluded. With regard to the question of the hon. and learned Member for Dumfries, I presume that as Lord Justice Henn Collins has been good enough to accept this office he sees no difficulty in combining it with his judicial functions. If the hon. Gentleman will put a question on the Paper I will consult with the Lord Chancellor, with whose department the matter rests. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Waterford as to the powers of this tribunal, as I believe it to be a thoroughly impartial tribunal I am sure that any re-presentations made by the hon. Gentleman with regard to any evidence he may have to give, either on the subject about which he asks a question or any other subject connected with the Patriotic Fund, will be attended to by the Committee.

The right hon. Gentleman has misunderstood my question. I did not ask whether evidence would be received, which I take for granted, but whether the constitution of the body would be so altered as to meet objections entertained by certain classes.

I do not think that any alteration of the body would meet the criticisms. If I altered the body to meet the wishes of the hon. Gentleman I would also have to alter it to meet the wishes of other hon. Gentlemen who have asked me questions. There is no conceivable way of framing a Committee which will command absolute assent on every side of public opinion. I have endeavoured to frame an impartial tribunal. There are only two ways of constituting such a Committee as this. One is to have represented on it all the various supporters of various questions brought before the Committee, and the other is to establish an impartial tribunal. Both bodies are effective in their way: but I have chosen the latter as the better one to deal with this particular matter.

May I ask whether this Committee will have power to call for persons and Papers—

Order, order I think notice should be given of that and all other questions relating to this matter.

Perhaps you will allow me to ask the right hon. Gentleman—

Order, order! The hon. Member must give notice.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether any German official conveyed a warning to any official of Her Majesty's Government that Germany had reason to believe some act of aggression was con templated on the part of British subjects against the Transvaal, shortly prior to the Jameson raid.

The only reference to this subject with which I am acquainted will be found on page 550 of the appendix of the Report of the South African Committee.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the term "native districts" will include all districts where the natives form a majority of the population, in districts of South Africa; if British forces, as well as Boers, are to be expected to refrain from entering or utilising native districts; and if British troops, as well as Boers, will be instructed to retire from all such native districts.

The answer to the first question is in the negative; and to the second, that I cannot lay down rules in a matter which is subject to military considerations, but that the principle guiding the question is to keep the natives entirely out of the struggle if possible, but not to prevent them from defending themselves and their property if they are attacked.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what constitutes a native district?

That depends on who uses the term.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Boers have invaded Zulu-land; whether he is aware that a large Hying column of mounted troops was despatched many weeks ago from Natal to Zululand previous to any incursion by Boer troops; and whether Her Majesty's Government will inform President Kruger that these British troops will be with- drawn if the Boer troops also are withdrawn.

The answer to the first question is in the affirmative. As to the second, yes. A small flying column appears to have been sent about five weeks ago, but the Boer forces had previously violated the border and attacked and burnt the magistracy at Ingwavuma at the end of October. The answer to the third is no, Sir. I do not know whether the hon. Member is aware that Zululand is under British control.

I am also aware that other parts are under British control. Is it not a fact that the contention of the Government is that the Transvaal also is under British control?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to certain statements recently made in a French newspaper, Le Siè le, according to which French and German investors own upwards of one-half of the total shares in Transvaal gold mines, and British investors in the British Isles and in the Colonies own less than one-half of the total of such shares and whether he has any information which would confirm or contradict these statements.

I have not seen the statement, and I have no information enabling me either to confirm or to contradict it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a large number of Indians in Natal have offered their services free of cost and whether and to what extent that offer has been accepted.

Yes, Sir. A number of Natal Indians volunteered for service in any capacity without remuneration, and though their services as soldiers were not accepted, they were engaged to act as leaders for the Indian ambulance bearers. I do not know the exact number so employed. The facts are stated at page 249 of Cd. 43.

In view of the large pay being given to the colonial soldiers, will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the desirability of offering some remuneration to these Indians?

I do not think that would be a courteous way of treating their offer to serve without remuneration.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has any information with regard to a report widely circulated in India that among Her Majesty's subjects who received notice last October from the Boer Government to quit the Transvaal on the outbreak of hostilities were eighty-two British Indian settlers of Natal; that although they wished to return to Natal they were forcibly deported to India; that prior to their embarkation they were placed in charge of the Portuguese military authorities at Delagoa Bay; and that while thus detained Portuguese soldiers subjected them to brutal treatment, robbed them of all their money, and, outraged the modesty of their women; and if so, will he state how it was that the British representative at the place of detention did not remonstrate with the Portuguese authorities, or take other necessary measures for the protection of the refugees.

The Foreign Office has no information in regard to the incident referred to. Many British Indian subjects who fled from the Transvaal to Lorenzo Marques were sent to India, their passages being paid out of the Lord Mayor's Fund. Her Majesty's Consul at Lorenzo Marques will be instructed by telegraph to report the facts.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state how many Uitlanders from the South African Republic are serving with the British forces in South Africa, and in what regiments they are enrolled; and how many citizens of Natal and of Cape Colony respectively are serving with British forces.

I have not the information necessary in order to discriminate between Uitlanders and others serving in colonial forces raised in South Africa.

Will the hon. Gentleman undertake to inquire? I understood the Colonial Secretary to promise to get the information.

I am afraid it will be quite impossible to get the information, probably until after the war. A great number of these forces are serving in different parts of South Africa, and we cannot undertake to ask for an elaborate return from the officers commanding the troops in the field.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is in a position to state the reasons that have led to the resignation of his Canadian command by Major General Hutton.

Major General Hutton has been given employment in South Africa, for which he has long been anxious.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether a British officer in the army commanded by Lord Methuen refused to obey Lord Methuen's orders in face of the enemy. And whether this officer has been relieved of his command and is now in England.

I have no knowledge of any British officer in South Africa having refused to obey orders.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether 12s. a day is paid to troopers in Colonel Bayly's corps in Cape Colony; and, if so, whether the expenses of this corps are charged on the colony or on the Imperial Treasury.

The corps to which the hon. Member refers cannot be identified; but I am not aware of any corps in which the pay of a trooper is 12s. a day.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the frequent reports as to the use of field glasses by the Boers, the War Office will issue a certain proportion of field glasses to Her Majesty's troops, especially to the mounted branches.

Yes, Sir. A large number have been sent to South Africa. I have already stated this.

Will the War Office take steps to recoup the officers of Regular regiments who have already provided field glasses for the N. C. O.'s and men at their own expense?

I will consider that matter.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether convicts in Irish gaols are being offered pardons on condition that they will enlist for service in South Africa.

Before the hon. Gentleman answers that question, I would ask him if he thinks he ought to take notice of so scandalous a question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether instructions will be given to commanding officers in South Africa not to prohibit the wearing of shamrock by Irish soldiers on St. Patrick's Day next; and whether any stops will be taken by the War Office to send shamrock to the Irish troops in South Africa.

No instructions are necessary. Commanding officers have authority to allow emblems to be worn, if they think it expedient.

The hon. Member has not answered the last part of the question.

The War Office is very fully occupied in sending to South Africa for the benefit of the troops stores of a more substantial character, which in the circumstances are likely to be more appreciated.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the 17th Lancers embarked for South Africa six officers short of their establishment; whether the other regiments of the 4th Cavalry Brigade are also short of their proper number of officers; and whether efforts were made to fill up the vacancies from the Reserve of Officers or from the Yeomanry.

Two of the regiments referred to were short of officers on embarkation, chiefly because some of them were already serving in South Africa. Those officers may be ordered to join their units at the discretion of the general officer commanding. Vacancies have been as far as possible filled by eligible officers from the Reserve or from the Yeomanry or other sources. In one case there were as many as three.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the fact that officers recently gazetted and ordered to the front are required under the regulations of the War Office to spend a considerable sum in the purchase of uniforms which cannot be used while the officers are on active service; and whether the regulations will be relaxed in favour of such officers.

Officers embarking for South Africa are only required to have undress uniform besides their khaki outfit.

Has not complaint been frequently made by officers in this respect?

I have received no such complaint; every officer will appreciate having an undress uniform on board ship.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of Imperial and Colonial troops under arms in South Africa, and the number on their way there, or about to be despatched to the seat of war.

I must refer the hon. Member to a full account which I gave in reply to a question put on the 8th instant by my hon. friend the Member for North Islington.^* The total is 194,000.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, whether his attention has been directed to the inconvenience caused by the arrangement under which only one of the two service companies of the Gordon Highlanders, accepted for service in South Africa, were able to leave Aberdeen on 16th February; whether both companies were ready with kits and accoutrements packed for shipment, under orders from the War Office, on Thursday the 15th to start for Southampton; and why at the last moment the authorities only provided transport for one company; and whether instructions will at once be issued to insure the departure of the second company at the earliest possible moment.

Although it is now evident that there were two service companies of Volunteers of the Gordons for service in South Africa, it was not so understood, and provision was

^* See The parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxxviii., page 905.

not made for the transport of the second company. It has now been ordered to embark on the 24th inst. in the place of a company which is not ready, but for which transport had been taken up.

On behalf of the HON. MEMBER for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether Colonel McClane and Mr. A. C. Welch have been sent to Austria to purchase 1,000 horses at £ 50 each, and whether any offer was made on similar terms to obtain a supply of horses from Ireland; and whether export officials expressed an opinion that they could do better in Ireland.

These two officers were, I believe, sent to Austria by the Imperial Yeomanry Committee, and not by the Remount Department of the War Office. The War Office is purchasing horses in Ireland.

Is any agent employed by the War Office to purchase horses in the south of Ireland?

I am unable to say. I know we are purchasing horses in the north, and a right hon. Gentleman has just submitted a complaint that we are buying more horses from Catholics than from Protestants.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether Reservists' wives are obliged to produce the birth certificates of their children before they can receive the separation allowance for them; and that, as the registrar's fee for each certificate is a fixed charge of 3s. 7d., a hardship exists in cases where women have several children, or are too poor to bear this initial expense; and whether, by reason of the special circumstances and urgency of the case, their fees might be remitted, or that some other form of declaration costing nothing might be arranged and accepted by the paymaster.

No, Sir. The Reservist on joining declares the name and address of his wife and the number of his children, and the separation allowance is issued on this evidence; but if through the carelessness of the Reservist or for other reasons a certificate of marriage or birth were required, the cost of obtaining such certificate would be ad-admitted as a charge against the public.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the intention of the Government to embody any of the Militia Artillery; and whether, having regard to the scarcity of officers in that force, they are prepared to offer any inducements to gentlemen to apply for commissions.

I will ask my hon. friend to postpone this. May I add that if hon. Members would give longer notice it would be an act of consideration on their part which would be very highly appreciated by the staff of the War Office.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether instructions were recently issued by the War Office, directing that Militiamen under eighteen years of age will be paid during embodiment at the rate fixed by Royal Warrant for boys in the Regular forces, namely, 8d. per day, whereas those affected by the order were all enlisted as men, were promised 1s. a day pay, and have been doing men's duty.

There was some misapprehension on this subject at first; but instructions have been given to all general officers that Militiamen on embodiment are to have the full rate of 1s. a day.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if the 6th Battalion of the Warwickshire Militia, which has left for South Africa, has been without rifle practice since last year's training; if the 5th Battalion of the same Militia, which is daily expecting to leave Colchester for the front, is only having Morris-tube practice, but no shooting at the range: and if Lord Compton's Horse, during their training at Colchester, had only one day's rifle practice, and for that had to go to Landguard Fort in another county owing to the Colchester rifle range being still closed.

In reply to the first paragraph no Line or Militia battalion practises in the winter. The 5th Battalion is not going to South Africa. As to Lord Compton's Horse, I have no information; it is quite impossible to obtain it at so short notice.

I hog to ask the Under Secretary for War if the same securities as regards attestation in each individual case possessed by recruits for the Regular Army are equally possessed by individual members of the Militia, in connection with volunteering for foreign service; and, if not, why not.

The question asked of a Militiaman on enlistment as regards his service is—"Are you willing to be attested for the term of years (provided Her Majesty should so long require your services) as a Militiaman for the county of, to serve in the corps." On assenting he becomes liable to serve wherever his corps is ordered on home service. He cannot be sent abroad unless he personally consents to do so. His securities are in every way as complete as those of the recruit of the Regular Army.

Is the same question put to a man when he is asked to go on foreign service as when he is asked to serve at home? If not, why not?

I think the hon. Member is confusing the two things the original enlistment and the chance offered the man of volunteering for foreign service.

Will the hon. Gentleman be good enough to tell me—[Interruptions.]

Order, order!

I do not think I ought to be interrupted in this manner. What I want to know is whether the same questions are put to a man when he is asked to got abroad as when he is enlisted for home service?

I have stated that several times, and I believe the hon. Member has another question on the Paper raising the same point. He has been told that after a man has volunteered the general officer always gives him an opportunity of reconsidering his decision.

Is it not the fact that in the first case the Militiaman is asked individually—

Order, order! If the hon. Member has any further question he must put it down. He cannot now enter into an argument.

I beg to give notice I will raise this question in another form.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what records, if any, and how substantiated, exist as to the alleged volunteering for foreign service of soldiers of the Irish Militia, not Reserve men; if he will produce these records in the case of the South Cork Militia now stationed at Dover. And whether the orders for embarkation of the Louth Militia stationed at Sheffield have been cancelled: and, if so, why.

An independent staff officer was present, when the South Cork Militia paraded, in order to ensure that no pressure was put upon the men. He reported that some men were unwilling to go on foreign service. There is no other record. The orders for the Louth Militia to embark have been cancelled because an insufficient number of men were willing to go. A Scottish battalion has taken its place. I may add that there is a keen competition among Militia battalions for the honour of serving abroad.

Is this the regiment the hon. Gentleman referred to in his speech last night?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he will inquire whether the Wexford Militia stationed at Aldershot have refused to proceed to the front, and if so on what grounds; and whether any of the men are to be tried by court-martial for refusing to go to the war.

The required proportion did not volunteer for foreign service. To ask why any did not volunteer would be putting on pressure, which has always been avoided.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the Yeomanry and Volunteers are being invited to train for a month, the War Office will take immediate steps to replace the members of the permanent staff who have gone to South Africa, or who are engaged in training the Imperial Yeomanry.

Yes, Sir. Steps are being taken.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the abortive result of the War Office Reorganisation Committee after sitting for sixteen months, the Secretary of State will consider the advisability of dissolving that committee and appointing a fresh one for the purpose of investigating the methods of conducting business in the military, financial, ordnance, and works and buildings departments of the War Office; and whether he would have any objection to associate with that inquiry some of the Members of this House who have had wide experience in the conduct of commercial and professional undertakings, and others who are acquainted with the requirements of the Army.

No such step is at present in contemplation.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether discharged soldiers of twelve years service rejoining the colours will be permitted to serve on for a pension.

My hon. friend will find in an Army Order published today the terms governing bounty and pension for discharged soldiers who re-enlist in Reserve battalions. In respect of the fifteen permanent battalions, men who re-enlist and have at least three years to serve will be allowed to serve on for pension. The conditions upon which this will be permitted are under consideration.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the officer in command in Mauritius has reported on the recent outbreak of the British Central African Regiment there; and where the regiment is to be stationed in the future.

Yes, Sir. The terms of the report are favourable as to the conduct of the men generally, who were undoubtedly the subject of much insulting and provocative treatment by the inhabitants of the island. The second part of the question is under consideration.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what steps are proposed to be taken in connection with the scheme of the Government for increasing the efficiency of the Army to create a proper effective medical organisation for the Militia, Yeomanry, and Volunteers, and would it be represented at the War Office by proper staff officers; and if it is proposed to give effect to the numerous recommendations to the War Office to create the bearer companies of the Volunteer infantry brigades separate units, independent of any particular regiment or regiments of the brigade.

This subject is one of the many connected with the organisation of the Auxiliary forces which are now being considered.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in view of his appeal to the county gentlemen of England to work with the War Office in putting the Militia where it can be, and ought to be, he will fully recognise the position which the deputy lieutenants hold towards the Militia in raising Militiamen, and will specially encourage them to organise local efforts for this purpose.

A deputy lieutenant has no legal function in connection with the Militia unless the Ballot Act is put into force, but every effort which these gentlemen may, in virtue of their local influence, be able to make for encouraging enlistment in the force will be fully appreciated by Her Majesty's Government.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he can see his way to avoid, as likely to be misunderstood by those not acquainted with military phraseology, the official use of the term, "army corps," except when applied to two or more organised divisions, united under one commander, with a corps staff and corps troops; and whether, instead, he will enumerate troops in the field, and those called out for home defence, by divisions, brigades, or smaller units, according to the commanders and staffs actually doing duty with them, to make clear that these terms represent units of organisation, as in Continental armies, and are not units of numeration which can be arrived at by simple division of the total force.

I fear that my hon. and gallant friend's suggestion would lead to confusion and constant repetition. It is well known that by an army corps we mean in this country two cavalry regiments, twenty-five infantry battalions, eighteen batteries field artillery and two Royal Horse artillery, with a proportion of Royal Engineers and Army Service Corps.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the statement made by Rear-Admiral Lord Charles Beresford, prior to taking up his present command, to the effect that in the event of war swift and specially equipped colliers, telegraph ships, and repairing ships would be essential to the efficiency of the fleet^*; whether the Admiralty shares this view; and whether ships of the kind suggested are in existence; and, if not, whether it is intended to construct them or to await the outbreak of war and then to improvise them.

I have seen many suggestions as to vessels of this kind made in various quarters, both in and outside of the Admiralty. The most appropriate time for me to state the Admiralty policy in these matters is in the debate on the Navy Estimates.

Was not a design for swift armed colliers submitted to the Admiralty three months ago?

I will make my statement on the Navy Estimates.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it has been brought to his notice by recent despatches from the Governor of Western Australia that a strong and widespread agitation has arisen in the goldfields section of the colony for admission to the Australian Commonwealth as a distinct and separate State, the Government of Western Australia having failed to follow the example of the other colonies concerned and to submit the Commonwealth Bill to a referendum; whether he is aware that a petition to Her Majesty embodying this request has already received 25,000 signatures; and whether the prayer of the memorialists will receive his favourable consideration when preparing the Australian Federal Enabling Bill to be submitted this session.

^* Speech of Lord Charles Beresford at a banquet given by the London Chamber of Commerce, 9th January, 1900.

The answer to the first question is in the negative. As to the second, I have no official information. In reply to the third. I have to say that I will carefully consider with the delegates from the other colonics whether any steps can he taken to facilitate the admission of Western Australia as an original State of the Commonwealth.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the arrangements for the construction and laying of the Pacific Cable are still in abeyance; whether he is aware that the price of the metal for cable manufacture is rapidly rising, and the supply of gutta percha steadily diminishing; that this delay is causing widespread anxiety in Canada: and if he would use his good offices to accelerate the taking in hand of the work.

The question of the arrangements for constructing and laying the Pacific Cable is under the consideration of a Committee, on which the Imperial Government and the colonies interested are proportionately represented, and Her Majesty's Government understand that the deliberations of the Committee will soon be completed. The Committee is aware of the state of the market for cable materials.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in reference to the remarks at pages 4 and 13 of the recently issued Annual Report on the Cocos-Keeling Islands, whether Direction Island has been leased as a landing station to the Eastern Extension Company in connection with their proposed new cable to Australia.

I have no information that any lease of Direction Island has been granted by Mr. Ross. An application from the Eastern Extension Company for the right to land a cable in the Cocos-Keeling Islands is now under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education if he will grant a return of subscriptions to each voluntary school in England and Wales for each year since 1893.

It is in contemplation to give a return this year in continuation of the return presented in 1894, which will contain such information on the subject of subscriptions to voluntary schools as will, I hope, satisfy the purpose of the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, under Section 20 of the proposed Statutes of the University of Birmingham, degrees could be granted to students in affiliated colleges in theology or any other faculty not recognised in the charter.

The hon. Gentleman asks for a legal opinion on the construction of a public document which the Committee of Council are not qualified to give.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman can tell me to whom I should apply for information?

To the Attorney General.

Then perhaps the Attorney General will answer the question.

Order, order! The hon. Member must give notice of the question.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether persons desirous of becoming efficient rifle shots by joining and practising with rifle clubs would have to obtain a 10s. licence to entitle them to use a rifle for such practice; and, if so, would he consider whether the tax could in such cases be remitted in order to encourage rifle practice throughout the country.

At the same time may I ask whether persons who are members of rifle clubs formed to encourage rifle shooting have to obtain a 10s. licence to entitle them to practice rifle shooting; and, if so, whether the Government will grant exemption from such tax to the members of such clubs, at any rate when the ritle club has been certified by a military authority duly authorised for that purpose to be a club bona fide formed to encourage rifle shooting.

The reply to the first paragraph is in the affirmative; but I shall be quite prepared to concert with Lord Lansdowne some arrangement by which an exception may be made in favour of rifles belonging to clubs acting under the authority of the War Office and used solely for target practice under proper regulations.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, on I what grounds certain postmen (formerly designated as porters) employed in the parcel sorting department at Edinburgh, have had withheld from them the increase of wages which usually accompanies promotion to the postmen's class; why! they have not been granted the customary boot allowance, as from April, 1897; on what ground they do not have precedence on the wages sheet over postmen appointed subsequent to April, 897, the period from which their transfer to the postmen's class was to date; and whether he is aware that officers in the Dublin office who held similar positions to the change in 1897 have had granted them all the privileges which the Edinburgh men complain have been withheld from them.

The porters at Edinburgh to whom the hon. Member refers were transferred to the Postmen's Class on 1st April, 1899, and not on 1st April, 1897. They have received from 1st April, 1899. the wages and boot allowance to which they are entitled, and they rank on the Postmen's Class according to the date of transfer.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in cases where the Excise authorities discover that whisky in bonded stores is deficient either in strength or quantity, the owner of the whisky is required to pay the excess loss to the revenue.

The general practice of the Revenue Departments is that if the deficiency arises from leakage, unavoidable accident, or natural causes (such as evaporation from the length of time the spirits have been kept in warehouse), the duty is not chargeable, but, if it is not traceable to any such cause, the trader is called upon to pay the duty on the deficiency.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that workmen in Her Majesty's service have certain sums deducted from their wages towards a pension amounting in some cases to five per cent., and that if such workmen die before attaining the age of sixty their dependent relatives do not receive any pension at all; and whether he will cause an inquiry into the matter with the object of compensating the dependent relatives of such workmen under these circumstances.

The hon. Member's question is somewhat vague, and I have not been able to trace the specific deductions to which he refers. There are cases such as that of the dockyard workmen under the Admiralty in which a pensionable and a non-pensionable class exist side by side, the latter receiving higher wages in proportion to their duties. In such cases the difference in part represents the workman's expectation of pension; but that pension is expressly made contingent upon certain clear conditions, the principal of them being that he shall, unless permanently incapacitated at an earlier age, reach the age of sixty before becoming entitled to receive it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is any legal authority for instructions lately given to the Inspectors of Factories not to enforce the requirements of the Factory Acts with regard to the hours of women, young persons, and children in the case of firms executing orders for the equipment of the troops: and whether, in accordance with the constantly expressed opinion of Her Majesty's Inspectors of Factories on the subject of overtime, the distribution of the order to a large number of firms and better organisation of the work would meet the case.

The express power given to the Secretary of State by the Factory Acts to grant exemptions in case of a, public emergency applies, strictly speaking, only to factories belonging to the Crown: but I am sure that the right hon. Baronet and the House will agree with me that during the present crisis I should not have been justified indelaying the equipment of the troops by a rigid enforcement of the overtime regulations in factories working for the Crown. The question raised in the second paragraph is scarcely one for me to decide, but I may say that I am in consultation with the War Office, and will take care that, so far as I can secure it, the latitude allowed does not go beyond the necessities of the case. I am not aware of any application with regard to children, and I have given instructions that all cases shall be carefully watched and reports made to me from time to time.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire how far these firms have been executing private orders in ordinary working hours and doing Government work in overtime?

It would be very difficult to find out, but I admit it is very desirable to restrict overtime as far as possible.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state, for the information of farmers, at what premium per £ 100 of wages they could protect themselves by insurance with responsible insurance com- panies in the United Kingdom against the liability which would be imposed upon them in the event of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1897, being extended to agricultural labourers; and can he state whether the premiums asked by insurance companies, before the operation of the Act had been tested by experience, have already been considerably reduced in respect of accidents in the dangerous occupations to which the Act is at present confined.

I have no information on the first point which is not available to anyone who asks insurance companies for estimates; but I believe that the premium quoted ranges between 2s. 6d. and 3s. per £ 100 of wages. The premium must, of course, depend on circumstances, and might be varied by experience if the Act were extended to agricultural labourers, just as it is, I think, a matter of common knowledge that the charges made by insurance companies with respect to trades within the Act are considerably lower, in many cases, now that the Act has been in operation some time, than the figures originally suggested.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he adheres to the statement made to Parliament by the Under Secretary of his department on 15th March, 1899, when he informed the House that the Government had decided to deal with the questions of dangerous lamps and oils, and that their Bill had long been in preparation and was in a forward state; and whether he will inform the House when he intends to carry out the decision of the Government arrived at a year ago.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave the hon. Gentleman the other night.^* It is quite true we have a Bill dealing with the question, which is a highly controversial one, but I do not think the present a favourable opportunity for introducing it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman adhere to his decision to deal with this question at some future date?

^*See page 82 of this volume.

I can give no further promise. I have admitted it is desirable to deal with it, but at the present moment I cannot see my way to bringing in a Bill.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in appointing the Committee to inquire into the working of the Patent Office, he had in view the serious disadvantages British inventors and manufacturers suffer from the inferior service of the English Patent Office, in contrast with the American and German Patent Offices, in not examining into the originality of applications; whether any inventors or manufacturers, or any representative of the patent agents outside the Chartered Institute were appointed on the Committee; whether any amendment of the patent laws or any reduction in the present renewal fees is contemplated; and when the report of the Committee will be presented to Parliament.

The inquiry that is now being made is more limited in its scope than the question of the hon. Gentleman would seem to imply, but the importance of such an inquiry as the hon. Member contemplates is fully recognised by me, and the matter is receiving my careful consideration. I am not however able to make any announcement at present.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he has observed that dissatisfaction has been expressed in commercial circles throughout London against certain proposals which are embodied in two Private Bills now before Parliament, with the object of amalgamating the London Docks into one company, with extended powers of levying tolls and dues at greatly increased rates; and whether, considering the importance of this subject to the commercial community, the Government would be willing to appoint a Select Committee (to whom both Bills might be referred) with power to inquire into the present position of the Port of London, and to take recommendations as to the nature of the reforms that may be necessary.

My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this. So far as the Amalgamation Bill is concerned it is, I understand, merely a domestic arrangement, conferring no extra powers of charge on the companies, and I therefore see no reason why it should not be referred to a Committee in the ordinary course if the House reads it a second time. With regard to the other Bill it is clear that if it be road a second time the character of the Committee to which the Bill is referred will require careful consideration.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps have been taken by the South Eastern and Chatham and Dover Railways Company to improve the condition of Ludgate Hill Station, in view of the letter from the company to the Board of Trade of the 20th October, 1899, intimating that plans were then being prepared showing what improvements could be effected, especially in regard to access from the platforms; and if he will use his influence to expedite the carrying out of the necessary works for the protection of the public.

The general manager informs me that the companies "will do whatever is possible to diminish the inconvenience of which complaint is made," but that, for financial reasons, they would not be justified just at present in carrying out so large a scheme as is involved in the plans which have been prepared. A doubt is also expressed as to whether the work could be accomplished without obtaining further express Parliamentary powers.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, having regard to the fact that the deer forest area in the Highland crofting counties of Argyll, Inverness, Ross and Cromarty, Caithness, and Sutherland has been largely increased within recent years, will the Secretary for Scotland, with a view to placing a limit on the afforestation in these counties, consider the expediency of empowering the Crofter Commission to determine any proposed afforestations in the Highlands?

No, Sir.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state the names and nationality of foreign trawlers observed by the Fishery Board cruisers in the Moray Firth during the year ending 31st December, 1899.

I am informed by the Fishery Board that during the year 1899 their cruisers observed twenty-two Gorman, ten Belgian, eight Danish, five French, four Dutch, and three Norwegian trawlers working in the Moray Firth. Some of these were observed on more than one occasion, while others were seen only once. I cannot give all their names in the answer to a question, but if the hon. Member desires to have them he can apply to the Scottish Office.

Will the hon. Gentleman say what waters the trawlers were found in? Was it not the high sea?

The hon. Member, if he looks at the question, will find it deals with the Moray Firth.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, having regard to the fact that under the Western Highlands and Islands Works Act, 1891, it was the practice to make grants in aid for the construction of harbours equal to two-thirds of the estimated cost of the work, will he explain why the Congested Districts Board, which now undertake work formerly conducted under the Act above referred to, have in some instances recently declined to make a grant of more than one third of the estimated cost of the work.

The Congested Districts Board deal with the applications referred to by the hon. Member on their merits, and do not consider they are bound by any practice that may have previously existed.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works, whether an indicator of the debates in the House of Lords can be placed in some convenient part of the lobby of the House of Commons.

The question of supplying further indicators of debates is under my consideration. I do not, however, think that there is any general demand for an indicator of the Lords' debates: having regard to the fact that these debates are not of frequent occurrence or of prolonged duration.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether any steps have been taken to carry out the recommendations of the official experts, that only pottery in which the glaze is leadless should be used by the Office of Works.

I issued as long ago as August last a regulation that all articles for domestic use supplied under contract for the Public Departments, the Houses of Parliament, and such of the Royal Palaces as are under my charge, shall be made with leadless glaze. I may mention that my department had been taking experimental steps in this direction before the report of the Committee referred to; and considerable advance has been made in the extension of the regulation to the supply of earthenware, stoneware, and glazed bricks used for sanitary or architectural purposes, which have to be obtained as required by the surveyors of my Department.

Are other Departments following in the same steps?

I believe so, but I can only answer for my own.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, in the event of there being no fresh outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the county of Norfolk within the present week, he can remove the present restrictions from all the districts scheduled, or at all events from some of them.

My right hon. friend asks me to state that it will not in any case be safe for him to withdraw all restrictions on the movement of animals in the scheduled district or any part thereof so soon as the end of the present week, but in the absence of any further outbreak of the disease he proposes to issue an order to further modify those restrictions in the course of a day or two with a, view to meet the more pressing cases of hardship and difficulty to which they give rise. In the meantime it is most satisfactory to him to be able to state that no further extension of the disease has been reported.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is able to grant under special conditions special licences for the movement of stock from a farm situated outside the scheduled area into a farm situated within that area, in cases in which it is shown that grazing requirements render that movement necessary.

My right hon. friend asks me to state that, in the absence of any further outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Norfolk, he proposes to issue in the course of a day or two a further order which will afford relief in cases of the class to which the hon. Member refers.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is now able to reconsider the area of the scheduled districts.

My right hon. friend asks me to say that he does not consider that it would be safe as yet for him to reduce the area of the scheduled district, but, as I have already stated, he proposes in the absence of any further outbreak of the disease to further modify the restrictions in the course of a day or two.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he can comply with the request of the executive committee of the Norfolk County Council, that in the event of there being no fresh outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in the county of Norfolk the scheduled district should be reduced by omitting the petty sessional divisions at the extremities, viz.: North and South Erpingham, Forehoe, and Diss, as these areas are far from the present seat of the disease.

My right hon. friend asks me to state that the suggestion of Norfolk executive committee has been carefully considered, but he does not consider that it would be safe as yet for him to reduce the area of the scheduled district. The further order which he hopes to be able to issue in the course of the next day or two will materially reduce the hardship and difficulty to which the restrictions give rise.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he will be able to allow the market for fat cattle, sheep, and swine to be opened on Friday next in the town of Diss, which is about 25 miles distant from the scene of any outbreak of foot and mouth disease.

No, Sir; my right hon. friend informs me that a considerable risk would still attend the holding of any market in the scheduled district, and he regrets therefore that he cannot see his way to make any concession as yet in favour of Diss.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, with reference to the appeals against the amount of the value of several holdings on the estate of the Earl of Gosford, whether the appeals were made to the Chief Commissioner's Court against the-amount of the true value fixed by the Sub-Commissioners; whether the law, as at present, obliges the Land Commission to fix a less amount for the true value than the price which the tenant could by competition obtain in the open market; whether he is aware that in the cases of Robert Carlyle, Stevenson, Glenny, and Patterson the gross amount of £ 765 fixed by the Sub-Commissioners was reduced by the Chief Commissioner to £ 520; and whether the tenants have any remedy or are entitled to any compensation for the large sum of which they have been thus deprived by the Appeal Land Commission.

There were five cases on the estate of the Earl of Gosford in which appeals were recently heard by the Land Commission against the decisions of a Sub-Commission fixing the amounts of the true values of the holdings. The principles on which true values are fixed, and on which the Land Commission acted, are expressed in the judgment of one of the members of the Court of Appeal in the reported case of Curneen v. Tottenham. They may be summarised thus: The relation between the true value which the landlord must pay and the full price which the tenant might got in the open market is very similar to that which exists between the fair rent which the Land Commission is bound to fix and the competition rent which the landlord is no longer at liberty to exact. The gross amount of £ 765 fixed by the Sub-Commission was reduced by the Land Commission to £ 620, and not £ 520 as erroneously stated in the third paragraph. In such eases the loss sustained by the tenant is identical in character with that sustained by the landlord when the fair rent is fixed. Neither of the parties has any remedy, or is by law entitled to any compensation.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on how many occasions during the last two years extra police have, been drafted into the County Mayo: what is the total cost of such extra police; and how many have been so drafted.

Extra police have been drafted into the County Mayo on two occasions during the past two years. A draft, consisting of fifty men, was sent to the county on the 4th March, 1898, and this force is still employed there. In April, 1899, a draft of one head constable and twelve men was sent to preserve the peace at local government elections. The total cost of the force of fifty men employed in the county is £ 3,446 5s. per annum, one-half of which is chargeable to the county. The cost of drafting the force of twelve men on the occasion of the elections last year was £ 21, of which a sum of £ 3 16s. 1d. has been charged against the county.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the sum which at present car be borrowed by urban authorities in Ireland for public purposes is limited to an amount equivalent to double the valuation of buildings within the urban district, with the addition of the double of one-fourth of the valuation of lands, except in a few instances in which they have obtained special Acts of Parliament. Whether this fact does not in many cases preclude these authorities from undertaking schemes for water supply, drainage, the better housing of the poor, and other improvements under the Public Health Acts, and also from purchasing or establishing gas or electric light undertakings. And whether, in the Bill to amend the Local Government (Ireland) Act to be introduced by the Government, the law will be amended so as to exclude from the limitation as to borrowing all moneys expended for reproductive purposes, such as under the Housing of the Working Classes Act, and in connection with lighting.

The limit of borrowing is correctly stated in the first part of the question. There are not many cases where these limits have been found to have debarred the local authorities from undertaking desirable works, but when this has occurred the authorities have usually sought an extension of their borrowing powers by private Acts. I do not consider, therefore, that the fact that the limit has been reached in a few exceptional cases affords sufficient grounds for removing the very salutary restrictions against local indebtedness imposed by Section 238 of the Public Health Act, 1878. The answer to the last paragraph is in the negative.

As this is a matter of very great importance to local authorities in Ireland will the right hon. Gentleman, if facts are laid before the Government which show that the Act is practically inoperative because of this provision, consider the advisability of giving the powers asked for in a new Act?

I can make no promise until I hear the facts.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, as representing the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he tan explain the reason why the Government have decided to omit from the new commissions issued for the holding of the various courts of assize and commissions of oyer and terminer in Dublin and other cities and corporate towns of Ireland the names of the lord mayor or mayors of such places.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a letter has been recently addressed to the Town Clerk, Dublin, from the Chief Secretary's Office, Dublin Castle, stating that the new commissions issued to Her Majesty's Judges for the holding of the various courts of assize and commissions in Ireland do not include the names of lord mayors or mayors; and why the usual custom has been departed from on the present occasion.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland why the new Commissions to Her Majesty's Judges in Ireland for the holding of courts and assizes and commissions do not include the names of the lord mayors and mayors; and whether this omission will be rectified in view of the feeling upon the subject in Dublin and elsewhere.

The lord mayor and mayors are the chairmen of borough councils, and, having regard to the fact that controversy has arisen as to the control and maintenance of court houses, and that these and other questions connected with local government may come up for consideration and decision before the Commissioners of Assize, it was thought desirable, in the interests of the administration of justice, to omit from the commissions, the names of gentlemen who might have a direct official or personal interest in matters for decision. The change made has no other significance whatever.

Is it not true that the difficulties to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred have not existed in the city of Dublin? Could not an exception easily be made in the case of the Lord Mayor of that city?

Is it not also the fact that the position of the Mayor of Kilkenny was exactly similar before the passing of the Local Government Act?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the course adopted casts a slight upon popularly elected chief magistrates, and that—

Order, order!

Is it intended that this exclusion shall be permanent, or is it only in connection with circumstances which exist at the present moment?

It will last as long as these provisions of the Local Government Act are in force.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland when the inquiry into representations recently made under the Labourers Acts in Longford will take place; and whether the necessary notices will be given before 1st March, so as to give the labourers whose applications are approved a chance of having their plots of land ready for the spring sowing.

The new improvement scheme referred to in this question has not yet been forwarded by the District Council for the approval of the Local Government Board. When received, arrangements will be made for holding, as soon as possible, the requisite local inquiry into the matter. In any case, however, possession of the plots could not be obtained by the District Council until after the provisional order becomes absolute.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland can he state the number of tenants on the Annaly (county Longford) estate who have purchased their farms through the Land Commission; whether any applications were refused; and if so, how many and on what grounds; and whether inquiry will be made from the receiver as to his reasons for not carrying into effect the promises he made to induce tenants to sign undertakings to purchase their farms from him, which undertakings, whilst binding the tenants, have not been given effect to by the receiver.

The number of tenants on this estate who have purchased their holdings is 176. These were the only cases in which applications under the rules were lodged, and, consequently, no regular applications have been refused. With regard to the third paragraph, I am informed that no charge in this matter has been preferred against the receiver. Any such charge, if made, should be brought before the land judge to whom the receiver is responsible. I do not propose, therefore, to suggest to the land judge that an inquiry should be held by him into the action of the receiver.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state if there are any districts in the county of Kerry on which there is levied a rate of over 2s. in the £ for the year 1899-4900 for railway guarantees; and, whether he is aware that the ratepayers of Kerry contribute annually about £ 15,000 as rates levied on guaranteed railways; and, if so, whether the Government can see their way, either by a free grant of money or by wiping out a portion of the railway indebtedness, to relieve the heavy burden of taxation on the ratepayers.

The rate exceeds 2s. for the purpose mentioned, in the Barony of Corkaguiny only, where it amounts to 2s. 10d. The gross amount presented for railway guarantees during the present financial year in Kerry was £ 17,671, which amount, however, included the Treasury recoupment of £ 2,600, so that the actual amount borne by the rates was £ 15,071. Any additional contribution to the county out of the Local Taxation Account under the provisions of Section 58, Sub-section 4, of the Local Government Act, 1898, in respect of railway guarantees, will not be payable until after the 31st March proximo. The Government do not propose to take any further action in the direction suggested in the question.

On behalf of the hon. Member for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the disease of pink eye has been introduced into Ireland by the importation of foreign horses, and whether he will cause inquiries to be made; and whether any steps have been taken by the authorities to cope with this outbreak and to prevent the spread and assist in the cure of this epidemic.

The disease known as pink eye has existed in Ireland for a considerable period, and the disease also exists in Great Britain. It has been stated that the outbreak in and about Dublin this season was due to the importation of horses from the United States via Liverpool, but though there is no available evidence that such is the case, inquiries are being pursued in the matter and as to the extent to which it prevails generally. Pink eye is not scheduled as a disease under the Diseases of Animals Acts, and the Veterinary Department has been advised that it would not be expedient, at present, to issue any order on the subject. The disease is engaging the careful attention of the authorities.

On behalf of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Dublin University, I hog to ask the Vice-President of the Agricultural Department for Ireland whether any appointment has been made to the office of Secretary of the said Department; and can he state by whom the said appointment is made, and what is the salary attached to this office.

The post referred to has been offered to and accepted by Mr. Thomas P. Grill. The appointment has been made by the Department, to stake effect as from April 1. The salary has been fixed by the Treasury at £ 1,300.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he could explain to the House the circumstances which have influenced the Lords of the Treasury to authorise Her Majesty's Board of Customs to allow, upon certain conditions, the exportation of carbolic acid and other similar articles, the exportation of which was recently strictly prohibited by Royal Proclamation; whether the bulk of these articles is exported in a crude state and is refined on the Continent (frequently being mixed with other raw material produced there), so as to make it impossible to trace the ultimate destination of any particular consignment after it has been refined or converted; and whether, as the object of that proclamation was to prevent articles which are capable of being converted into lyddite, melinite, and other high explosives, and for the supply of which Continental and other nations mainly rely upon this country, from reaching the Queen's enemies he will rigidly enforce the original terms of the Royal Proclamation.

I am informed that very careful inquiry was made into the export trade in carbolic acid and other similar articles. It was proved to the satisfaction of the Government that there was a large and innocent trade in these articles in foreign countries and in the colonies with which it is clearly inexpedient to interfere. The destination of these consignments can be traced very accurately; indeed, a largo proportion of the exported material comes back to this country. My hon. friend may rest assured that the instructions which have been given will not in any way defeat the object of the proclamation.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury has the Treasury during the current financial year refused to give Treasury sanction, when such sanction was applied for by the departments concerned, to extra expenditure which such departments desired to make in respect of the provision of transport, of the purchase of transport animals or transport material, or in respect of the purchase of provisions, arms, ammunition, clothing, or equipment to meet the emergency created by the situation of affairs in South Africa; if so, can he say, roughly, in respect of how many millions of pounds worth of proposed expenditure Treasury sanction was refused, and generally in respect of what kind of expenditure, and at what dates.

My right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has already answered this question, and I have no hesitation in repeating that answer.^* It is in the negative. I think it is not very expedient that we should in this House, by way of question and answer, or otherwise, discuss the relations between the various offices of the Government.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consent to the appointment of a Select Committee to consider and report on the manner in which various departments of the War Office under the present system are now conducted.

My hon. friend will probably agree with me that this is not a very fortunate moment to suggest the inquiry he desires.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Her Majesty's Government will consider the desirability of withholding their sanction from future agreements between the Eastern Telegraph Company and the subsidiary companies and the Cape, Indian, and Australian Govern-

⁸ See The Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series]. Vol. lxxviii., p. 180.

ments until Parliament has had an opportunity of taking cognisance of them; and whether, if the Government have no control over these conventions so far as regards the colonies, Her Majesty's Government would point out to the colonial Governments concerned the expediency of abstaining from any final decision until an Imperial policy of a comprehensive nature, embracing colonial interests, has been formulated by Parliament in the course of this session.

I think my hon. friend will see that the. matter to which he calls attention in this question is one which cannot really be dealt with by the Imperial Parliament alone. It is a matter for negotiation between the self-governing colonies and the home Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give time for the discussion of the subject?

There are opportunities which my hon. friend shares with other members for bringing the matter before the House, but I cannot give him any of the Government time at our disposal.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the alterations made by the Boundary Commissioners, with reference to the recently created boroughs, as governing the limits of the Parliamentary divisions of the Metropolis, are to be enacted this session: and whether opportunity will be afforded to the inhabitants of the areas affected of raising objections to the proposed alterations.

The hon. Member will see by a reference to the Act that Parliamentary boroughs cannot be altered by the Act of last year, which only deals with municipal areas.

Is it the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill to alter the Parliamentary boroughs to correspond with the municipal boroughs?

No, not now.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in the event of any opposition being raised to the Consolidated Fund Bill, which is down as first Order, he will seriously proceed with it. If he does—(the hon. Member shrugged his shoulders and resumed his seat.)