laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, that, in the case of the following Rills, referred on the First Reading thereof, Standing Order No. 62 has been complied with, namely:

laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for private Bills, that, in the case of the following Bills, referred on the First Reading thereof, Standing Order No. 63 has been complied with, namely: British Gas Light Company (Staffordshire Potteries) Bill. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Electric Supply Bill. Wellingborough and District Tramroads Bill. Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.

said he had on several occasions had to call attention to the Bills of this company. The fault was not his; it was rather that of the company. His action was taken in the interests not only of his own constituents, but of the vast body of gas consumers on the north side of the Thames. The object of this Bill was to enable the company to increase its capital by two and a half millions sterling, and the measure was identical with one introduced last session, the Second and Third Reading of which he unsuccessfully opposed, as he failed to get the support of the majority of hon. Members. When, how ever, that Bill went to another place the course which he had respectfully urged the House of Commons to take was adopted by the House of Lords, and it threw out the measure. It would be in the remembrance of hon. Members that last year the House appointed a Select Committee to inquire into the metropolitan gas companies. That Committee had made some very important recommendations, which had, however, been entirely ignored by the Gas Light and Coke Company in their present Bill. The company had. in fact, not shown the slightest disposition to comply with any one of the five important recommendations of the Committee, and he thought he was not going too far when he suggested that in so acting they were showing something very like contempt towards the House. Complaint had for a long time been made of the excessive charges for gas made by this company, as compared with other companies, whether metropolitan, suburban, or provincial corporations or companies, and it was important to note that the difference in price had been constantly increasing for the last ten years. Taking the South Metropolitan Company for the purposes of comparison, he found that in 1889 the difference between the charges of the two companies was 3d. per thousand feet. In 1890 it was 4½d., in 1891 5¼d., in 1892 7d, in 1893 7¾d., in 1894 7¾d., in 1895 there was a slight drop to 5¾d.: in 1896 6¼d., in 1897 6½d., and in 1898 8¼d.: and this constantly increasing difference had been going on in spite of the fact that the company had all the natural conditions in its favour. It was the largest gas company in the world; it had the largest and richest district to supply; it had a larger area of supply than any other metropolitan company, and the amount of gas sold per mile was larger in the case of the Gas Light and Coke Company than in the case of any other company in London. Why was it, then, that the price charged was so high? The Report of the Committee showed clearly and decisively that the company had long been breaking its statutory bargain, because in 1867, what was known as Mr. Cardwell's Committee stated that gas companies were entitled to divide their 10 per cent, dividend only on the condition that their affairs were conducted with "due care and management." He would like to draw the attention of the House to the Report of last year's Committee, which, he submitted, amply bore out the charges he had made against the company. It was as follows—

"The Committee have very fully considered all the evidence submitted to them, and. after giving due weight to the reasons offered by the Gas Light and Coke Company in explanation of the higher price charged for their gas, they are of opinion that the affairs of the company have not been well managed. The intention of the sliding scale was to give to the consumers a special interest in economical administration, while the control was left exclusively in the hands of the company. Hence there was an implied obligation on the part of the company that their affairs should be administered (to quote the language of Mr. Cardwell's Committee) 'with due care and management.' Your Committee have arrived at the conclusion that this has not been done. Hence, the intention of the Parliamentary bargain, which was in effect made, has not been realised by the company, and thus the benefit to the consumers which was contemplated when the standard price was fixed nearly a quarter of a century ago has not been obtained. With regard to Mr. Field's explanations on the subject of over-capitalisation, your Committee would point out that even accepting integrally the sums of £1,500,000 and £400,000 expended respectively on the Beckton Works, and on extra storage in case of emergency, they only amount to a total of £1,900,000. On the other hand, the difference in the capital cost of 3s. 8d. per 1,000 feet, as shown above, between the Gas Light and Coke Company and South Metropolitan Company, amounts, on the 21,000 millions of gas sold by the Gas Light and Coke Company in 1898, to £3,850,000."

He submitted that the findings of this Committee amply justified the charge which had been brought against the management of the company. Now he came to another topic. It was stated in the memorandum which had been issued by the promoters of the Bill that one reason for desiring to increase the capital was to enable the company to meet demands, coming mainly from the working classes, to have gas supplied to them by means of the automatic meter, or, as it was more commonly known, "the penny-in-the-slot" system. But how was the company treating a very large portion of its gas consumers? The company was under a statutory obligation not to charge to its customers south of the Thames more than was charged by the South Metropolitan Gas Company. Its charge was, therefore, limited by law to 2s. 2d. or 2s. 3d. per thousand feet. But the company, finding its charges thus cut down, sought to make up the deficiency by imposing an excessive price for the fittings which they themselves supplied, and consequently the working-class consumers were charged for these fittings at the rate of 1s. 2½d. per thousand feet, the fittings being precisely the same as those for which the company charged its cus- tomers north of the Thames only 9½d. The Committee to which he had referred drew attention in strong terms to various malpractices on the part of the company, and it recommended that, whenever any metropolitan gas company came to the House to increase its powers for raising capital, Parliament should impose a reduction of the statutory price and insist on a revision of the sliding scale. Good sound reasons were put forward for the adoption of such a course. The Committee pointed out, in the first place, that since the statutory prices were fixed the cost of producing gas had been largely reduced, while, in the second place, it was now possible to obtain capital at a much lower rate of interest than formerly. Then the Committee recommended that if any gas company were granted powers to raise fresh capital it should be limited to a period of five years. Yet the company were showing great disrespect for the Committee by seeking to get the power for a period of nearly twenty years instead of five years. I his was no doubt a very unusual proposal, and when Mr. Field, the representative of the company, was last year asked if they had ever made such a proposal before, the reply was, "I do not think so." It was clear, therefore, that the company had adopted an entirely unusual practice in substituting twenty years for ten years, which had been the usual term in the past. The reason was obvious. During the last ten years there had positively been a decrease in the amount of gas sold by the company, with the exception of the business done through the automatic meters, and it was upon that that the company had based their estimate of future financial requirements. Was it necessary, he ventured to ask, to give the company powers to raise fresh capital? His answer was in the negative, because there was another source from which the money could be obtained and at the same time a great advantage be conferred on the company. The Committee had recommended that the South Metropolitan Gas Company should be empowered to purchase the property of the Gas Light and Coke Company on the south side of the river and to serve their customers in that area with gas. Now that would be an advantage not only to the public but to the company, because after all its right to supply gas south of the Thames was what he might call a damnosa hereditas. It was compelled, as a matter of fact, to sell its gas south of the Thames at less than cost price, and it had been established by evidence that while the cost price was 2s. 4½d. per one thousand feet, the legal charge to the consumers was only 2s. 2d., and the total loss to the company represented something like £10,000 per annum. It was because of that the Committee recommended that power should be given to sell the company's property south of the Thames to the South Metropolitan Gas Company. At the present time there was a Bill before the House promoted by the last-named company with the object of purchasing such property and rights of supply, and if it were earned the Gas Light and Coke Company would receive a very large capital sum as the result of the sale, and it would in consequence be placed in possession of sufficient funds for the present, and would not require any accession of capital. Under these circumstances he thought it was very desirable that the House should reject this Bill, and he begged to move that it be read a second time that day six months.

said he knew it was a difficult thing to persuade the House to reject a private Bill on the Second Heading. But they had an example the previous day of the fact that the House sometimes did so, and if the House was not prepared to exercise its functions in matters of this kind it would be better to abolish Second Readings altogether, and not go through the farce. If ever there was a Bill which ought to be rejected, the Bill now before the House came under that category. He wished to give the House two or three points why he thought this strong course should be adopted. His first point was that this Gas Light and Coke Company continually flouted Parliament, and paid not the slightest attention to any recommendations made either by the general law or by Select Committees appointed to consider the matter of gas. The House ought to consider this subject a little more seriously than it had done. Only last year a Select Committee on London Gas Supply sat for twenty-one days and made five recommendations. It was a great presumption that the greatest gas company in London should come there with a Bill in which they took not the slightest notice of these recommendations. The Committee recommended that the standard price should be reduced 6d. per thousand feet. That was not noticed in the Bill. The Committee recommended that the company should sell their southern area, and that area was not sold. The Committee recommended that slot meters should be regulated by the Board of Trade, and the prices corrected. Nothing whatever had been done in that direction. Now there were 120,000 of those slot meters in the area served by this company, and the company had absolutely disregarded the recommendations of the Select Committee thereanent. The general law stated that the precise capital sum proposed to be raised should be stated in the Bill, but that was not done. In fact, this was almost the same Bill which was rejected last year. His most serious point was that owing to over-capitalisation and mismanagement this company was a burden on the whole population of London north of the Thames. The price of gas charged south' of the river was 2s. 1d. per 1,000 feet, whereas the Gas and Coke Company charged 2s. 11d.: and although they did not charge for meters the excess of the charge for slot meters counterbalanced that. There were two and a quarter millions of people in the company's area, and that excess of 10d. per 1,000 feet meant an extra burden on the people of £800,000 per annum. He would put it in another way. In a business with which he was connected they paid £639 last year for gas supplied by the Gas and Coke Company, whereas if they had been supplied by the other company it would have only reached £444—that was, there was an extra tax of £195 which they were compelled to pay the former company. It might be said that business men could take care of themselves, but this monopoly pressed on the poor people of London, who were the great consumers of gas There were 120,000 consumers by the slot, and they had to pay £2 15s. per slot or 19s. or £1 per year more than they would have to pay if served by the company on the other side of the Thames. That was a very serious monopoly. All legislation in regard to gas had been in the direction of reducing the price. Gas was, after all, light, and light was a necessity of life. And why should the House give a monopoly to a company of a necessity of life? It would not give a monopoly of soap, or candles, or tea, or sugar, and why of gas? Again, the company wanted by the Bill two and a half millions of new capital, but that would serve them for fourteen or sixteen years. Why on earth should Parliament give them power to raise capital for the next sixteen years, when the company had at present £450,000 of unissued capital, and £600,000 at the credit of their capital account? Again, they could raise capital by selling their southern area to the South Metropolitan Gas Company, which was willing to buy it. He believed that the only difference between the two companies was in regard to the price, and on a fair basis the South Metropolitan Gas Company offered the Gas Light and Coke Company a million for it On all these grounds, he contended that the House should not hesitate to reject the Bill, and he had great pleasure in seconding the motion of his hon. friend.

said that if the hon. Member for South West Bethnal Green had his way he would not allow Londoners to have either gas light, electric light, or water; because he came down there consistently, session after session—he supposed at the instigation of his friends the London County Council—

Not in the slightest degree; at the instigation of my constituents.

said he had a recollection, at all events, of the hon. Member posing on former occasions on behalf of the London County Council, and it might be assumed that he was acting for them on that occasion. He was not going to follow the hon. Member into any of the details he had placed before the House—details which were expressly for the consideration of the Committee upstairs. It was absolutely impossible for the House to say whether the price charged for gas by the Gas Light and Coke Company was too high or not. They knew that it was higher than the price charged by the South Metropolitan Company, but there might be plenty of reasons for that. He agreed with the hon. Member for West Islington when he said that the House would have to take into serious consideration whether it was desirable to have Second Readings of Private Bills at all, but not for the reason he gave, but because the time of the House ought not to be taken up with those details, which were for the Committee upstairs. The Member for South West Bethnal Green said that the Bill entirely disregarded all the recommendations of the Select Committee of last session, but he was told that those recommendations could not be incorporated into the Bill. The hon. Member for West Islington had said that the Gas Company had no right to ask for powers to raise further capital, when that which they already had was sufficient to last for a number of years, but it was idle to suppose that they would have gone to all the expense of promoting this Bill if it had not been necessary. The hon. Gentleman had also charged the company with fraud against the poorer classes by the use of the penny-in the-slot meters. That charge ought not to be made, having regard to the fact that that way of supplying gas to poor people had created a vast amount of satisfaction among them. He had no interest in the company either as a shareholder or otherwise, but he thought the usual course taken in the House in regard to industrial companies should not be departed from. He hoped the House would not support the rejection of the Second Beading.

disclaimed having any interest in the company, either personally or as representing his constituency. Nevertheless, he hoped that the House would pause before it rejected all these private Bills on Second Reading, unless they contravened, and he understood they did not, some well-recognised principle on which the House proceeded. It was true that a private Bill had been rejected on Second Reading on the previous evening, but that Bill had also been rejected by the Committee upstairs, which was not the case with the present Bill. The company was prepared to sell its works to the South Metropolitan Gas Company, and had made an offer which had not been accepted. They were also willing to go to arbitration. He hoped the Bill would not be rejected.

agreed that the House ought not to throw out a Bill on Second Beading on matters of detail, but a Committee of the House ought to have a full opportunity of considering such details. In the present case, however, it was not a matter of detail. The promoters of the Bill had deliberately ignored the five recommendations made by the Committee which sat last year; and great dissatisfaction had been expressed by that Committee in their Report. It was a very strong measure for a private company to introduce a Bill to the House and not incorporate a single recommendation of the Committee. Under the circumstances, if Committees were to be of any value at all, the Second Reading of the Bill ought to be rejected.

, as a large consumer, supported the Bill. He thought the House would do well to pass it, having regard to the fact that more gas was required, and unless their capital was increased the company would not be able to supply cheaper gas or a larger quantity. The increase of the penny-in-the-slot meters necessitated considerably more capital to set them up. He disagreed with the views of the opponents to the Bill, and thought if the company was bought up by the Metropolitan Gas Company the prices, so far as the consumers in the north were concerned, would be increased.

hoped the Bill would be read a second time by a large majority. He advocated the passing of the Bill entirely in the interest of the consumers. With hon. Members opposite he shared regret at the disregard by the Gas Light and Coke Company of the recommendations of the Select Committee. In his opinion the Gas Light and Coke Company had treated the House of Commons with an absence of respect in introducing a. Bill which had entirely ignored the recommendations of the Committee. But he was not so anxious to punish the company as he was to mitigate the sufferings of gas consumers in the north of London. Whether the company was asking for too much capital or not was a question of detail which could not be adjudicated upon by the. House of Commons, but should be referred to a Committee sitting upstairs.

expressed a strong and sincere hope that the House would reject the Bill. As he understood them, the facts were simply these: There were two large gas companies in this great city, one of which practically dealt with the north of London, and the other with the south. The company in the north charged 2s. 11d. for that which in the south cost only 2s. 1d. Some hon. Gentleman had said that it could be clearly proved that it was just to charge 2s. 11d. in the north for what 2s. 1d. was charged in the south, but no endeavour had been made to prove that. It was impossible to prove it. The Committee of the House of Lords which had rejected this Bill recommended that when the company came before the House of Commons to raise new capital this question of the difference of price should be raised, and an attempt made to compel it to reduce its prices to those of the South London company. That recommendation had been absolutely ignored. He failed to see how the hon. Member for East Islington, who supported a Bill in favour of allowing the company to continue its excessive rate, could reconcile his action with his regard for the interests of his constituents. The great argument in favour of giving the company additional capital was the enormous facilities it gave to the poor by the penny-in-the-slot system. He understood, however, that those facilities were given by the company in the south as well as the company in the north of London, with this difference: that the company in the south charged 9d. per thousand feet of gas, while the company in the north charged 1s. 2½d. Therefore this enormous boon to the working classes was afforded at the expense of a difference of 5½d between one part of London and another, with no division between them except the river Thames and no distinction of circumstances. Whether the company required more capital or not, it was not justified in coming to that House unless it agreed to the recommendation of the House of Lords Committee—namely, to bring its terms to an equality with those of the South London Company. He appealed to the House to take up a firm attitude on this question, and to safeguard one of the highest interests of the poor by seeing that light was given to them on reasonable and fair terms.

called the attention of the President of the Board of Trade to the improved form of the clause dealing with the running of workmen's cars, and expressed the hope that the right hon. Gentleman would give his assistance to the endeavour to put a similar clause in any other tramway Rills which might he introduced.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he will incorporate in the Return particulars showing (1) the names of individuals and firms who have furnished defective stores for the use of Her Majesty's forces in South Africa: (2) what were the defective stores in question; (3) in what respect they were found to be defective; and (4) the names of the officers who passed the defective stores.

The Return applied for by the hon. Member for Den- bigh has already been passed by the House unopposed. On behalf of the Secretary of State, I consented to the Return in that form. It will include all the information that we could include if it had been made in the form my hon. friend desires.

May I ask whether, when the Return is given, it will include the names of any officers or officer whether employed or not? As it stands on the Paper it will only give the names of officers who have ceased to be employed. I want the names of all, employed or not. I also want the Christian names and surnames of the contractors and the names of the directors in the case of companies, and the names of every member of a firm, so as not to allow any persons to escape under the form of a company.

The demand of my right hon. friend is rather extensive. If the Return took the form in which he has applied for it, it would not contain any more information than it will contain in the form in which it is granted. And for this reason. No limited company is concerned at all. There are only two contractors, one named Rennell and one named Brown, and they are private individuals. I do not think anything would be gained by giving the Return in the form asked for by the right hon. Gentleman.

Will the Christian name of Brown be given?

Oh, certainly.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has any news to give to the House from the seat of war?

I believe my hon. friend the Under Secretary for War has a telegram to read to the House.

We have received the following telegram from Lord Roberts—

"From information furnished daily to me by my Intelligence Department it became apparent that Cronje's force was becoming more depressed and that discontent among the troops and discord among the leaders' were rapidly increasing.

"This feeling doubtless was accentuated by the disappointment caused when the Boer reinforcements which tried to relieve Cronje were defeated by our troops on the 23rd inst.

"I resolved, therefore, to bring pressure to bear on the enemy. Each night trenches were pushed forward towards the enemy's laager so as to gradually contract his position, and at the same time I bombarded it heavily with artillery, which was yesterday materially aided by the arrival of four 6m. howitzers which I had ordered up from De Aar.

"In carrying out these measures the captive balloon gave great assistance by keeping us informed of the dispositions and movements of the enemy.

"At 3 a.m. to-day a most dashing advance made by the Canadian Regiment and some Engineers, supported by the 1st Gordon Highlanders and 2nd Shropshires, resulted in our gaining a point some 600 yards nearer the enemy and within about 80 yards of his trenches, where our men entrenched themselves and maintained their positions till morning— a gallant deed worthy of our colonial comrades, and which I am glad to say was attended with comparatively slight loss.

"This apparently clinched matters, for at daylight to-day a letter signed by Cronje, in which he stated that he surrendered unconditionally, was brought to our outposts under a flag of truce.

"In my reply I told Cronje that he must present himself at my camp and that his force must come out of their laager after laying down their arms.

"By 7 a.m. I received General Cronje and despatched a telegram to you announcing the fact. In the course of conversation he asked for kind treatment at our hands, and also that his wife, grandson, private secretary, adjutant, and servants ought accompany him wherever he might be sent. I reassured him and told him his request would be complied with.

"I informed him that a General Officer would be sent with him to Cape Town to ensure his being treated with proper respect en route. He will start this afternoon under the charge of Major-General Pretyman, who will hand him over to the General Commanding at Cape Town.

"The prisoners, who number about 3,000 will be formed into commandoes under their own officers. They also will leave hereto-day, reaching Modder River to-morrow, when they will be railed to Cape Town in detachments."

Is there any account of the guns which General Cronje is said to have had in his possession?

No, Sir, there is. no information beyond what I have read.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman whether these 3,000 Boers were captured by 40,000 British?

Ten to one—a glorious victory indeed!

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government have admitted, to the American Government that the United States ship "Sabine" was improperly seized, and whether any and what compensation is to be paid to the United States Government; and whether any, and, if so, what, ships belonging to Germany or other Powers were seized improperly by the British Government in connection with the South African war, and what compensation, if any, was claimed and will be paid by the British Government.

The "Sabine" is not an American, but an English ship. Papers with regard to the seizure of certain German ships will be laid before, the House.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the present crisis in South Africa and possible consequences that may arise there from, and also in view of the limited amount of breadstuffs (wheat and flour) in the United Kingdom, Her Majesty's Government will now consider the advisability of providing a minimum standing reserve of at least three months supply of bread- stuffs (wheat and flour) in this country as a part of our national system of defence.

As my hon. friend is aware, the subject of his question has been discussed in this House in debate, and in the form of question and answer it has been dealt with on other occasions. I do not know that T can add anything to what has before been said from this bench on the subject, nor do I think that the present war throws any light, one way or the other, upon the importance of the subject.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is still the intention of the Government to despatch the Eighth Division to South Africa: and, if so, how soon it will be sent.

Yes, Sir. It will start as soon as the transports are ready.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Merionethshire, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the Officer Commanding in Chief in South Africa has asked the Presidents of the South African Republic and the Orange Free State to allow women and children to leave besieged towns; if not, whether he will suggest that such request be made.

In the case of Ladysmith Sir George White made the request last November, but General Joubert would only permit them to go to a special camp four miles out. In the case of Mafeking no doubt Colonel Baden-Powell has made the best arrangements which the enemy would admit.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that parcels not sent by post but in accordance with the special regulations of the War Office circular to soldiers in South Africa, and forwarded on 25th November, had not arrived on 29th January, after a delay of nearly nine weeks; and whether he has yet arranged that parcels sent to the soldiers shall be delivered so that the rank and file shall not any longer be deprived of those comforts which are too heavy to go by post, and which people in this country are so anxious to supply them with.

The military authorities are doing all they can to secure the safe arrival of these parcels. But considering the masses of parcels which have been received, many improperly packed, many misdirected, and not a few without any address at all, it is not surprising that a proportion hare miscarried. Something would be gained if senders would always send their consignments in wooden cases.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the King's County Militia, now mustered at Birr, have been ordered to leave Ireland on Friday next; and, if so, what is their destination; whether the men have been asked to volunteer for service at the front; if so, was the question put to them individually or m masse, and what time was allowed to them to consider their replies; whether he can say what is the full strength of this corps; and how many, if any, of them have volunteered for the front.

The battalion is not at Birr, but at Woolwich, and is going to South Africa. Their volunteering for that service was in accordance with the usual procedure which has been explained more than once to the House. The full strength of the corps is 520 all ranks, and of these 518 volunteered.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the 4th Middlesex were sent to the front on Monday last in black helmets. and whether the War Office propose to provide them with khaki, or will they accept khaki helmets from private sources: and whether any troops have hitherto been sent out with black headgear.

The battalion embarked with black helmets, which were provided with khaki covers. Other battalions have been treated, in the same way. This is duo to the inability of the trade to keep pace with the large demands for khaki helmets.

I beg- to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that in the lift of casualties issued from the War Office on the 22nd instant mention is made of the East Kent Regiment and of the Yorkshire Regiment; on the 23rd of the Royal Highlanders and of the Yorkshire Eight Infantry: that all these are secondary titles, being placed in brackets in the Army List; and whether he can see his way to extend this practice, and use Royal Scots Greys in place of 2nd Dragoons; if not, whether he will say by what rule the War Office is guided in the use of these secondary titles.

TO save time the names of the regiments in the casualty lists are given as telegraphed. The titles to which the lion, and gallant Member refers are without exception those which appear on pages iv. to ix. of "The Monthly Army List."

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is in a position to state the arrangements the Government propose to make with regard to the expenses of mounted infantry detachments of Volunteer corps.

No, Sir, I am not yet in a position to make such a statement.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether a supplementary list can be placed in the Army List of civil surgeons employed with the Army in South Africa; and whether a list of the field hospitals, bearer companies, and general hospitals, employed in South Africa, can be placed in the Army List after the medical officers in the Army List, showing the names of officers with each hospital or company.

It is not the practice to insert the names of civilians attached to the Army in the Army list. It would be exceedingly inconvenient to do so, seeing the temporary character of their engagement. In regard to the pro- posal in the second paragraph, the changes constantly in progress following the disposition of the troops would render it quite impossible to keep such a statement up to date.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the reserve squadrons, composed chiefly of recruits, are intended for replacing casualties in the service squadrons: and it they are converted into service squadrons, as suggested, how will they increase the total strength of the cavalry or be in a position to supply recruits for the front.

Casualties in the service squadrons are replaced from the reserve squadrons, but the reserve squadrons are unnecessarily large, and in many cases squadrons for home service can be formed from them without unduly decreasing the power of the remainder to supply drafts. One squadron is 600 strong.

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.

Yes, Sir. Militia artillery will be embodied. Then: is no difficulty in filling vacancies amongst officers of embodied regiments. More Army commissions have been given recently to Militia artillery and two more have been offered to each Militia artillery regiment.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what provision is made by the War Office for the maintenance of the mothers of soldiers, especially of recalled Reserve men, who, through the necessities or casualties of military service, may he deprived of their sons' support.

The War Office assists a soldier who is not married to allot a portion of his pay for the benefit of his mother. A soldier can also make remittances of his savings for the benefit of his parents; no direct grant is made from public funds.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is the intention of the military authorities to bring from Singapore to England the 1st Battalion King's Own Royal Lancaster Regiment, now stationed at Singapore, and to relieve it by a Madras native infantry regiment: whether this battalion has been abroad for some years: whether it is composed of fully-grown and well-seasoned and efficient men, well acquainted with their officers and with each other, as well as being acclimatised to great heat: whether such a battalion so acclimatised would be especially suited for active service in the field, and being so near the seat of war, whether it would lie both more economical and effective to send this regiment direct to South Africa instead of sending out a regiment direct from England; and whether, unless service exigencies compel, the change from Singapore to the English climate, which at this season of the year will be trying to the health of all ranks, could be avoided.

The answer to the first question is in the affirmative. The battalion referred to has been live years in the Straits Settlements, where the heat is not excessive, though the climate is moist and enervating. The battalion is efficient, and all the men are above twenty wars of age. It is undesirable to send the battalion to South Africa if it can be avoided, as another battalion of the same regiment is already there. It is not expected that the change of climate will have an injurious effect on the health of the battalion.

Is it not the fact that the regiment only went to Singapore last. August?

My information is that it has been there five years.

Then that is incorrect.

I bog to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what is the present position of the Militia of Guernsey and of Sark; and whether the Jersey Militia are to remain organised as they were before the recent difficulties in the other islands arose.

Acts have been recently passed by the States of Guernsey and Jersey in regard to the Channel Islands Militia, and are at present being considered.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether any grants of money will be made to assist corporations and local authorities to form rifle ranges to meet the requirements of the present rifles now in use.

The whole question of rifle range's is now under consideration, and the suggestion of the hon. Member will not be lost sight of.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the War Office has yet come to a decision as to the adoption of a site for a rifle range at Dunstable, a report upon which was made to the office some time ago.

The question of constructing a range at Dunstable has received very careful consideration, but in view of the high price of the land and the small number of the troops who would use the range, it has been ultimately decided not to proceed further with the range.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, as the Chester Rifle Volunteers had last year to do their class firing at Owley Wood, at a cost in railway fares of 1s. 3½d. per man, and this year will have to do their class firing at Altcar, at a cost in railway fares of 1s. 10½d. per man, owing to the Owley Wood range being unsuited for the new tiring course under the new regulations, and as, at Delamere on Crown property and at Burton Point, both of which places arc much more convenient of access from Chester, there are ranges which have been passed by the Inspector of Musketry of the North-Western District, the War Office will take immediate steps to utilise one or both of these ranges.

Further inquiry will be made into the proposed ranges.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that in the accounts of the expenditure under the Military Works Act, 1897, the account of the expenditure for rifle ranges and manœuvring ground—which is estimated at a total of £950,000, and in respect of which the total expenditure to 31st March, 1898, was £354,872 7s. 3d.—contains no separate items whatever, but only the total expenditure as represented l)y the latter sum; whether this item includes expenditure on the purchase of land on Salisbury Plain; and whether, seeing that the Act requires that those accounts shall be delivered in the form required by the Treasury, he will require that the account of the expenditure in respect of rifle ranges and manœuvring ground for 1898–9 shall be so rendered, and with such items and details, as will enable the Controller and Auditor General and the Parliamentary Accounts Committee to which he reports to examine the expenditure in question.

The answer to the two first paragraphs of the question is, yes. Full details of the expenditure on rifle ranges and manoeuvring ground up to 31st March, 1898, were supplied to the Controller and Auditor General at the time; but the separate items as to rifle ranges were not stated it) the account laid before Parliament. The details of the Salisbury Plain expenditure were laid before Parliament in Paper C.9,032 of 1898; and more complete details have been subsequently given in two other Returns. The account for 31st March, 1899, has been presented though not yet circulated. This shows all the details of expenditure on rifle ranges for both years ending 31st March, 1898, and 31st March, 1899.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to a case heard at the Westminster Police Court on Tuesday last, where the persons summoned for creating a smoke nuisance alleged that the Government had purchased all the Welsh coal; and whether the quantity of Welsh coal consumed by the Government for all purposes during the past six months exceeded three percent, of the total production of coal in the South Wales coalfield during that period, or five per cent, of the production of smokeless coal.

My right hon. friend's attention has not been drawn to the case referred to by the hon. Member. As to the exact percentage of Welsh coal consumed by the Government, I am not able to give him any information.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will state the thickness of linoleum specified for in the case of the decks of Her Majesty's ships, and in particular for the decks of the torpedo flotilla; and can he state what steps are taken by the Admiralty to ensure that the linoleum supplied is in accordance with the quality for the supply of which tenders are invited.

Plain corticine or linoleum floorcloth of not less than 3-16in. in thickness is used for the decks of Her Majesty's ships (including torpedo boat destroyers and torpedo boats). The contract specification provides that this floorcloth shall "be answerable in every respect to the description given in the schedule—properly matured, and in point of material, make, and finish in every respect equal to the samples accepted at the time of tendering." Portions of the accepted samples are distributed to the dockyards, and deliveries are compared with the accepted samples before receipt.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Order in Council, under which the Governor of Malta declared under Proclamation on 22nd March, 1899, that Her Majesty's Government had decided that the English language should be substituted for the Italian as the language of the Courts of Law in Malta on the expiration of fifteen years from that date, has caused dissatisfaction amongst the elected members of the Council of Government of Malta as well as amongst the population; and whether, under these circumstances, he will consider the expediency of taking measures under which the Order in Council may be rescinded, or, failing this proposal, will he arrange to have the Order in Council so modified that it will be optional for litigants in the Maltese Courts of Law to have trials conducted in the Italian language when both parties to the suit are agreed on this course.

(1) The elected members of the Council expressed their dissatisfaction, but I have no reason to suppose that there is any widespread feeling among the population of Malta. (2) I am not prepared to alter my decision in the matter, but I may point out that the announcement is only to take effect in fifteen years, and if it is then found that the convenience of the people will be served by allowing the joint use of Italian, the matter might reasonably be reconsidered at that date.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the recently announced Russian loan to Persia was concluded between Russia and Persia with the knowledge of Her Majesty's Government; and whether Her Majesty's Government have taken any, and, if so, what action in the matter.

The answer to the first paragraph is in the negative. No statement can be made as regards action by Her Majesty's Government in regard to such a matter.

Was an offer made on our part to guarantee the loan?

I beg to ask the Under- Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that during the year 1898-9 fifty-five trawlers of various nationalities—namely, German twenty- two, Belgian ten, Danish eight, French five, Dutch four, Norwegian three, were observed by Fishery Board cruisers working in the Moray Firth, showing an increase of twenty-three on the previous year; and in view of the fact that the Moray Firth has been closed against British trawlers for the purpose of protecting the fishing industry and augmenting our fish supplies, will he consider the expediency of communicating with the signatories to the North Sea convention, with a view to the Moray Firth being closed against foreign as well as against British trawlers.

The facts are as stated in the question. The importance of protecting the Moray Firth against trawlers of any nationality is fully realised, and will not be lost sight of in any negotiations which may take place.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the recent serious outbreak in the Mauritius amongst the native troops drawn from the Yao and Atonga tribes of British Central Africa, will he consider the advisability of replacing these troops by Cape Boys, Zulus, or other natives amenable to discipline.

There is no intention of sending to Mauritius troops of the description named by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state the number of native troops sent to Mauritius from the British Central Africa Protectorate last year, the date on which they were despatched, and with what rifle they were armed.

The 2nd Battalion British Central African Rifles, consisting of 917 all ranks, embarked at Chinde on 22nd June, 1899, for Mauritius. They are armed with Martini-Enfields.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the exchange of ratifications of the Anglo- German Convention, he can now give an indication of the future governing arrangements in Samoa; and whether the Foreign Office has any information as to the position to be occupied by Mataafa.

No communication has been received from the German Government in regard to the future arrangements for the government of Samoa, beyond the fact that Dr. Self, who has been for some time past President of the Municipal Council at Apia, has been appointed Governor of the Samoan Islands assigned to Germany. The reply to the second portion of the question is in the negative. As the hon. Member is aware, the trading rights of British subjects are fully maintained by the treaty.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether representations have been made to Hoi- Majesty's Government by the American missionaries, by Mr. Sheppard or others in the Congo Free State, as to the murders and mutilations committed by the cannibal tribes under the Congo Free State flag, and with the alleged connivance of the state officials, in order to extort tribute, and attested by American eye witnesses; whether any inquiry has been or will be made; and whether Her Majesty's Government will make representations to the Belgian Government, under the provisions of any of the several treaties regulating the affairs of the Congo to which Great Britain and Belgium are parties, with a view to the better prevention of such atrocities and the punishment of those concerned in them.

No representations have been made to Her Majesty's Government on this subject. Any representations by American citizens would naturally be made through their own Government. Her Majesty's Government do not propose to institute an inquiry into or address official representations to the Congo State Government on the subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether the area scheduled in Bedfordshire, in consequence of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease, is smaller than the area scheduled in Norfolk and Suffolk; and, if so, whether the Norfolk and Suffolk area may be at once reduced to the dimensions of that scheduled in Bedfordshire.

The Bedfordshire scheduled district is somewhat smaller than that declared in Norfolk and Suffolk, but in the latter case the circum stances rendered it much more probable that the disease had extended locally, and this view has been confirmed by what has since occurred. The result of the contraction of the district would be to enable markets to be held and stock moved freely over the country out of the area from which the restrictions were withdrawn, and I do not consider that this could be allowed consistently with safety against the spread of the disease.

T beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has appointed a Departmental Committee to inquire into the facilities granted to inventors under the Patent Laws; and, if so, whether he will state the constitution of and the terms of reference to such Committee, and, in particular, whether the Committee is to inquire into the operation of Section 22 of the Patent Act, 1883, with regard to the powers of the Board of Trade to grant compulsory licences to work patents of which the public are being denied the due advantages.

I answered a similar question put by the hon. Member for Dundee on the 20th of this month,* but I have no objection to repeating my reply. The Committee now sitting were appointed to consider various suggestions which have been made for developing the benefits afforded by the Patent Office to inventors, and is simply examining questions connected with the publications of the Patent Office. The importance of such an inquiry as thohoii. Member contemplates is fully recognised by me, and the matter is receiving my careful consideration. I am unable to make any statement at present.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the superintendents and deputy superintendents of mercantile marine offices in ports at which they are situate are permitting seamen to be engaged on British vessels as "able-seamen," without such persons having previously produced forms of discharge proving their title to be rated as "able-bodied" seamen in accordance with Section 12G of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894; whether he is aware that the letters "N. P." (meaning "not proven ") are generally endorsed upon the ship's articles, opposite their names; whether instructions have been issued to superintendents to act in this manner; and whether he can state any section of the Merchant Shipping Act which empowers the President of the Board of Trade, or any other official, to override the express stipulation of section 126 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which provides that a man shall not be entitled to be rated as able seaman unless he can prove not less than four years' sea service before the mast.

I can only repeat the answer I gave to a similar question two years ago—

"The superintendents of Mercantile Marine Offices are instructed before entering a seamen as an 'A. B.' in any agreement to ask for proof of his qualification to be so rated; and the Board of Trade have no reason to think that they neglect this duty. If proof is not given the letters ' N. P.' are placed against the seaman's name, but the Board of Trade arc advised that they have no power to decline to allow a man to be shipped as A. B. because he cannot prove the requisite service."

There is no question of over-riding the provisions of the Act.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether his attention has been called to a statement that in 184 workhouses in England and Wales no chaplain or religious instructor of any kind is appointed by the guardians; whether this is in conformity with Article 153 of the General Order of the Poor Law Board of 1847; and what steps be intends to take in order to enforce obedience to the law.

I am aware of the statement referred to in the first paragraph of the Question. The article referred to in the second paragraph contemplates the appointment of a paid chaplain by the Guardians. But as I stated in the House on the 2nd June last,* the requirement has never been enforced by legal process since 1867. In cases where there is no paid chaplain, either the inmates have full permission to attend divine service outside the workhouse, or we have endeavoured so to arrange that divine service is usually per formed voluntarily by the vicar of the parish or a neighbouring clergyman.

Could not the appointment of chaplains be facilitated in some localities if the, appointment of Nonconformist ministers as instructors were permitted, so that the views of all denominations might be equally provided for?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been called to an alleged Report of a Departmental Committee to inquire into the work of telegraphists and their supervisors, dated 4th May, 1894, recently published; whether the practice had been, as there set forth, to complete the transcription of press messages within ten minutes of their receipt at the instrument, any time in excess of ten minutes having been regarded as undue delay; whether the Committee

^*See The Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxxii., page 278.

reported that in the public interest the demand for so expeditious a transcription of press messages should be resisted, and that the superintending officers should be given to understand that, if on the continuous transmission of a considerable amount of news as much as half an hour is occupied in its transcription, they will not be held to blame; and whether the advice given in that Report is still being acted upon.

The Report referred to was confidential. Some years ago, when the speed of transmission by the Wheatstone telegraph instrument was 100 words a minute, it took forty minutes to transmit 4,000 words of news; and, if the transcription began with the arrival of the first word of the message, the transcribers were expected to finish their work in fifty minutes, that is, ten minutes after the last word was received. At the present time it is possible to work the Wheatstone instrument at the rate of 400 words a minute, and thus to transmit a message of the same length in ten minutes; but it is obviously impossible for the transcribers to keep pace with this high speed, and if they take thirty minutes to complete the transcription after the receipt of the last word they still do the work ten minutes quicker than before, the comparison being between a total period of forty minutes and a total period of fifty.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he would state the amount of subsidies paid during 1898-9 to the Eastern Telegraph Company by the Imperial and Colonial Governments.

I presume that the hon. Member refers not to the Eastern Telegraph Company alone, but to the group of which it forms the centre. From Imperial funds £19,000 was paid in 1898-9 to the African Direct Telegraph Company and £63,000 to the Eastern and South African Telegraph Company, bat £18,000 was repaid to the Exchequer in respect of the latter subsidy (£10,000 from India, £7,000 from Mauritius, and £1,000 from Seychelles), and £5,000 in respect of the former (from various West African Colonies). From Colonial funds £15,000 was paid to the Eastern and South African Telegraph Company by the Cape Government, and £5,000 was paid to the same company by the Natal Government. £32,400 was paid by Australasian Governments to the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company in respect of the duplicate cable subsidy (which finally ceased in October, 1899) and £4,200 in respect of the Tasmanian Cable subsidy, besides a payment of £2,632 on a traffic guarantee for New Zealand cables which can hardly be reckoned as a subsidy. I understand also that the Government of the Straits Settlements paid £400 to the Eastern Extension Company in respect of a telegraph to Malacca.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has yet received the report of the inspector into the hours of employment in Longford 'post office; whether the hours of the men are alternately from 3 p.m. to 3 a.m., including a night delivery, which could be done by the auxiliary postman as well as the permanent staff; and will he see that the auxiliary man is therefore appointed.

No postman, it appears, attends from 3 p.m. to 3 a.m. An auxiliary postman could not be employed on the last delivery without reducing the average attendance of the two established postmen to less than a full duty, but the attendance of one of the established postmen will be readjusted so as to give him a longer interval off duty.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he has received a copy of a resolution unanimously agreed to by the Cookstown Board of Guardians at a special meeting held on the 10th inst., complaining of the inadequate postal arrangements existing in Tullyhogue, and pointing out that the foot post leaves Tullyhogue at 8.30 a.m., over 2A hours before the arrival of the next mail for Stewartstown, where the letters lie for 6 hours, namely, till 4.20 p.m., and requesting that the departure of the foot post from Tullyhogue may be delayed for 5½ hours, till 2 p.m., there by giving 3½ hours for answering letters and still leaving a margin of half an hour; and can he state whether the wishes of the people of Cookstown Union as voiced by their representatives will be acceded to.

The despatch of the post from Tullyhogue is already under inquiry. The result shall be communicated to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of evictions which took place under the 7th section of the Land Act of 1887 in the county of Cavan, west division; how many evictions were fully carried out; and in how many cases settlements were effected; and can he hold out any hope for the repeal of this section.

The official statistics of evictions are made up in respect of constabulary districts and geographical counties, and not according to Parliamentary divisions. The number of eviction notices served under Section 7 of the Land Act of 1887 in the whole County Cavan between the passing of that Act and the 31st December, 1899, a period of over twelve years, was 3,077. Put the number of tenants and subtenants who were actually evicted in the same period and not re-admitted as caretakers or tenants on the date of eviction was only 245, that is to say, a yearly average of about 20. The police have no records to show what has been done in the 3,332 cases in which the service of notices under Section 7 was not followed by actual eviction, though it may be assumed that in the great majority of these cases settlements were arrived at between landlord and tenant. I cannot hold out any hope for the repeal of the enactment referred to.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Joseph Magennis, of Derrytrisk, who is a tenant on the Dungannon School Estate, entered the Land Court to have a fair rent fixed sixteen months ago, and, notwithstanding the fact that during that time the Sub Commissioners sat three times in Dungannon, and will soon sit again, his case has not yet been listed for hearing: and whether he will inquire into the cause of the delay, and take steps to expedite the proceedings.

An application to fix a fair rent was lodged on behalf of the tenant named in the question in December, 1898. The case will appear, I am informed, on the next list to be issued containing cases from this district.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland with reference to the contributory poor law unions, whether the refund from the excise and customs duties is about to cease; and, if so, whether an equal grant will be made from some other source to those unions that decide to remain contributory, and to the others that may become contributory.

I replied yesterday to a question put to me on the same subject by the lion. Member for West Cavan, and to that reply, to which I have nothing to add, I would refer the hon. Gentleman.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland if he can give any particulars of the murder of Mr. William Bird, J. P., on Saturday last, at Pantry; whether any recent occurrences in the neighbourhood had been of a disturbing character; and whether any arrests have been made of persons suspected of being concerned with the murder.

A police report of this occurrence has now reached me, and the facts, I very much regret to say, point to the conclusion that Mr. Pird was brutally murdered. The deceased gentleman was found lying dead on the floor of his rent-office in Pantry, where he had been collecting rents, shortly after two o'clock in the afternoon of Saturday last. There were three bullet wounds in his, body—one in the heart, another in the back of the head, and the third in the upper part of his right arm. One arrest has been made by the police, but I could not answer the second paragraph without disclosing matters which might furnish clues to the police as to the perpetrators of the crime.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that in consequence of the refusal of the Land Commissioners to sit in Longford for the hearing of 176 County Longford cases, a number of people will be put to the trouble and expense of going to Mullingar, a county town of another county, thirty miles distant from Longford; and whether he can sec his way to making a representation to the Chief Commissioner, with a view to the venue being changed.

I have already informed the hon. Member, in answer to a similar question, that the Land Commissioners state they duly considered all the circumstances of these cases, and have fixed the place of sitting to suit the general convenience of the suitors.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Baltinglass Rural District Council made an improvement scheme for thirty-five labourers' cottages, of which only ten were passed by the inspector, Mr. Wilson Lynch; and whether, the inquiry having been held on the day of the fairs at Baltinglass and Castledermot, when the local councillors could not attend, he will accede to the request of the Baltinglass District Council to order a supplemental inquiry into the proposed improvement scheme.

The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. The Local Government Board are unable to say whether the local councillors were engaged at the fairs mentioned on the day of inquiry, but their presence at the inquiry was not absolutely essential, as the evidence of the labourers, the sanitary officers, or the relieving officers, is usually quite sufficient to prove the necessity for the erection of cottages, if such necessity really exists. Public notice of the time and place of the inquiry was duly given, and the Board cannot now accept further evidence upon this scheme. If the council consider that a case can still be made for any of the cottages rejected by the inspector, they must include them in their next scheme.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a man named Patrick Kavanagh, of Eurzyditch, County Wicklow, was, by order of the Vice Chancellor of Ireland, detained in prison for contempt of court during the period of one year and 237 days; that at the end of that time he was transferred from Kilmainham Gaol to the Richmond (Dublin) Lunatic Asylum, and that he is still in the Richmond Lunatic Asylum; whether during his incarceration he was examined, and how often, as to his health and mental condition by a physician experienced in mental diseases; and at what time during Kavanagh's detention of a year and 237 days was he found to be of unsound mind; and what offence did he commit in contempt of the Court of Chancery.

The facts are correctly stated in the first paragraph. Kavanagh was the defendant in a suit in the Court of Chancery, in which a certain holding of his was sold and purchased by a man named Dolahunt, who obtained possession from the sheriff. Kavanagh's contempt consisted in interfering with the sheriff in giving possession to Delahunt, disturbing Delahunt in the possession of the holding, and retaking possession from him. During the period of Kavanagh's imprisonment he was frequently examined by the medical officer of the prison, the late Dr. Carte, a physician of experience in mental and bodily disease. He was also examined by Mr. Woodhouse, the medical member of the Prisons Board. During the last six months of his imprisonment he was under special observation. His manner in prison was always peculiar, but there was little change in it until within a short time of his removal, and he was found to be of unsound mind seven days before his admission to the asylum.

May I ask whether the Government intend to deal in any way with a state of the law by which a man who has not committed any offence except contempt of court can be kept in prison for two years without any trial, and at the end of that time be discovered to be a lunatic.

This seems to be a reasonable question arising out of the right hon. Gentleman's answer. I do not think it is light he should he quite so discourteous.

I had no intention to be discourteous, but this is a question that should obviously be addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury. So far as I know there is no intention to change the law.

Then I address the question to the First Lord of the Treasury.

I understand this question arises out of one on the Paper. I have not seen the question on the Paper, and I knew nothing of the matter until I heard the answer just given. I have often heard, both here and in Ireland, comments on the law of commitment to prison for contempt of court, but I am certainly not in a position to promise any legislation on the subject at the present time.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether any steps will be taken by the Government to relieve the pressure of business in the Court of Appeal.

The Lord Chancellor has this subject under his consideration.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that the Crown Agent for Scotland experienced considerable difficulty in preparing the Deer Forest Return, No. 346, dated 8th August, 1899, owing to the lack of accurate information in regard to the area of deer forests in the Highland crofting counties; and will he, with a view to remedying this difficulty, consider the expediency of introducing legislation such as will admit of the form of Return, headed "Valuation of Lands and Heritages (Scotland)," being provided with a column in which owners or tenants of deer forests will lie required to state the names and acreage of each forest in their possession or occupation.

The information lately issued is believed to be approximately accurate. There is no difficulty in obtaining it, although much labour is involved. The answer to the second paragraph is in the negative.

In consequence of the very unsatisfactory reply of the right hon. Gentleman to the first part of the question, I beg to give notice I shall call attention to the matter at the earliest opportunity.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what business will be taken on Thursday and Friday?

The business on Thursday and Friday will be financial business. Probably the Navy Estimates will be proceeded with.

I could furnish half a-dozen good and sufficient reasons why the House should not adopt the antiquated motion just proposed by the First Lord: but I shall name only two. One is based upon the absurdity of the plea urged in its favour, namely, that it affords an opportunity for going to church on Ash Wednesday, whereas everybody knows that nobody wants to go to church, and that if any Member does want he is free to go, without endeavouring to prevent others attending this House, where they consider their duty lies. The second is a more practical reason, to-morrow the first Order of the Day happening to be the Mines (Eight Hours) Bill. Last session its promoters were unfortunate in the ballot, and the Bill could not be discussed, but this year they seemed to have obtained a good place, and to have a prospect of a division. This motion will, however, deprive them of two hours, and may even deprive them of a division, except as the result of that odious expedient the