I understand that this Bill has been postponed until the 22nd instant by arrangement.

May I ask if it could not possibly be taken before that date? There are several Bills of a like character which are to be referred to a Select Committee, and think that it would be a great pity if the proceedings of that Committee were delayed by reason of this Bill not being ready.

I can assure the hon. Member that he need be under no apprehension in regard to this matter. There are considerations entirely separate affecting this Bill, and I do not think anybody will be disposed under the circumstances to delay the proceedings of the Select Committee by unduly postponing this Bill. The object of the postponement is to endeavour, if possible, to come to some general agreement, and I do trust that the House may not be troubled by any debate upon the Bill.

In moving the Instruction which stands in my name, I may say that I did somewhat hope that it would be hardly necessary for me to trouble the House with the matter, as similar Instructions have already been before us, and have been agreed to, but a paper has been circulated this morning which seems to suggest that there is some objection to my proposal. According to that paper, the first objection is that the only reason for the Instruction is because a Select Committee has made recommendations in regard to this company. I do not think there could be any stronger reason for carrying this Instruction. This Select Committee has given nearly twenty days consideration to the question of London gas after an interval of twenty-five years, and if this House does not instruct the Committee to which the Gas Light and Coke Company's Bill is to be referred, to have regard to the decisions of that Committee, they may hear nothing more of its recommendations. Perhaps the chief argument used, however, is that the company was not heard against the recommendations before the Committee. Now, evidence was given before that Committee on behalf of the company by its secretary and chairman. They occupied seven whole days, they defended the views of the company in every way, and I do not think that in any sense it can be suggested that the company was not fully heard. But it is suggested that if we carry this Instruction, one part of which is that the standard price of gas shall be reduced, the reduction of the standard price will not really reduce the price of gas to the consumer. That is a little misstatement, because it will immediately reduce the price of gas, and I think the argument used in the paper which has been circulated is not a bona fide argument. The argument is this, that the reduction of the standard price can only affect new capital, and that, as the new capital is raised under the auction clause, whatever the terms may be it cannot affect the price of gas. That is hardly a candid argument, because if the Instruction is carried it will prevent such a large dividend being paid by the company, and there will be directly a reduction in the price of gas. Then, I may be asked, "Is it a fair thing?" "Is there a precedent for a reduction in the standard price of gas?" Yes, we had a precedent in the case of the Lea Bridge Company. The matter was fully considered before a Committee of this House; and, therefore, I do not think any value can be attached to the argument against this part of the Instruction. The second part of the Instruction deals with the company's area, and again I am asked if there is a precedent for transferring the area of one company to another. But this is a very peculiar case indeed. This matter was fully considered by the Select Committee, and when we remember the cheap price at which the gas is sold south of the river, and that that cheap price puts an extra tax upon all the consumers north of the river, I think it will be admitted that there is a good case made out for this particular recommendation of the Committee. There is one other point to which I must allude. There is a reference in the Instruction to the price charged by this company for the use of its "slot" meters. That is, perhaps, the most important recommendation, because in two portions of the area supplied by the company the charge for the use of these slot meters differs to the extent of 50 per cent. This company charges 9d. per thousand cubic feet north of the Thames for the use of these meters, and 1s. 2d. on the south side, and I do not think it can be suggested that there can possibly be the slightest reason why this great difference should exist. The Committee fully considered this point, and recommended that the charge should be the same in both parts of company's area. I understand that it is proposed to refer this Bill to the same Committee as the South Metropolitan Gas Company's Bill, and unless we carry this Instruction the Committee will not be cognisant of the decisions arrived at by the Select Committee after full consideration. I therefore beg to move the Instruction which stands in my name, and I hope the House will unanimously agree to it.

I beg to second the Instruction, and in doing so I should like to remind the House of the circumstances under which the recommendations embodied in the Instruction now before the House were made. A Select Committee was appointed last year to inquire into the affairs of the metropolitan gas companies. It investigated the affairs of all the gas companies in London, but it was an open secret that the complaints were mostly levelled against one particular company. The chief culprit against whom complaint was made in respect to the supply of gas was unquestionably the Gas Light and Coke Company. There were three charges practically made against that company. The first was that it charged excessive prices for its gas; the second, that the company was badly managed; and the third, that it had systematically disregarded the public interest. Upon each one of these three points the Committee took evidence at great length, and each point was proved up to the hilt. The Committee examined witnesses from the Board of Trade, the Corporation of the City of London, the County Council, and several vestries of the metropolis, as well as representatives of the three gas companies supplying the metropolis with gas. It can, therefore, hardly be contended that the inquiry was in any way one-sided, or that the parties interested on both sides were not given ample opportunity of being heard. Having heard the evidence, the Committee reached the conclusion that there had been bad management of the company, that it had not complied with the obvious intentions of Parliament when it granted, the company its privileges, and it made certain recommendations with a view to remedying the admitted grievances. These recommendations are embodied in the Instruction which has now been moved. It may be urged that this Instruction is of too mandatory a character. I would submit that, if there over was a case for a mandatory Instruction to a Committee, it is the present case, because the Gas Light and Coke Company have for years past been complained against, and endeavours have been made to voice those complaints in this House and in other places. It has been for years urged—unfortunately, in vain—that this company has failed to fulfil its obligations to the public, and it was not until six years of agitation had elapsed that the appointment of this Select Committee was secured. The recommendations made by the Committee go to the very root of the matter, and it was intended that they should be applied when the company should come to Parliament again for an alteration or extension of capital powers. Now, the Gas Light and Coke Company has come to Parliament for a further extension of its capital powers. It has come with a full knowledge of the investigations made before the Select Committee, and a full knowledge of the recommendations of that Committee, and it has, in a spirit of cynical indifference, flouted the recommendations of that Committee, and practically set at nought the authority of this House. If, as this Select Committee did report, there exists a genuine cause of complaint against the Gas Light and Coke Company, there is only one way in which these grievances can be dealt with, and that is by taking advantage of an occasion like this when the company comes to this House asking for further powers. This is the opportunity for securing that the recommendations of the Select Committee shall be carried into effect. Here is no question for any particular set of men, or for any particular section of this House. Here is an exceptional opportunity to show that honourable Members in every quarter of this House are resolutely determined to resist oppression and unjust treatment of the public on the part of any great corporation which, by favour of Parliament, is permitted to can on at a large profit the supply of a common necessity of life. The charges made by the Gas Light and Coke Company are admittedly high. By comparison with the charges of other companies they are extortionate; they exceed the charges of the South Metropolitan Gas Company by something like 33 per cent., and it cannot be contended that the difference in price is due to any legitimate difference in the circumstances of the two companies. According to the Report of the Select Committee, these excessive charges are due to mismanagement on the part of the company itself, and to a long continued and systematic disregard of the public interest. I do urge that on an occasion like this, when it is in the power of this House to remedy a real public grievance, the opportunity should not be allowed to pass unimproved, If this opportunity does pass now, the metropolitan gas consumers may find themselves for another twenty-five years, or even for an indefinite period, bound hand and foot by the privileges which this House affords to the Gas Light and Coke Company; privileges which were afforded on the understanding that they should be used for the benefit of the public, and for the legitimate profit of the company. There is no reason why consumers on the north side of the river should be mulcted to the extent of 33 per cent. more than those on the Surrey side, and I earnestly hope that my hon. friend will, if necessary, press this Instruction to a division.

Notwithstanding the speeches of the mover and seconder, I rise to propose an Amendment of a similar character to that which I moved on a like Instruction the other day.^* I do so because I do not think it is giving the Gas Light and Coke Company fair play to pass this mandatory Instruction before they have been heard on the various points involved. I may point out that, although I agree in the main with this Instruction, and I hope that the principles embodied in it will be adopted, I do think that the reduction in the standard price of gas is a very drastic reform to be undertaken. It certainly should be seriously considered before any such alteration is made. I do not wish to delay the House on this matter, but I think it is altogether against the spirit of the view taken by this House of Commons in regard to the operation of Private Bill Committees to pass such a mandatory Instruction unless there are circumstances of an exceptional character to justify it. Although I hope that many of the recommendations contained in the Instruction will be adopted in the Bill, I certainly hold to the opinion that the companies should be heard, and heard fully before any determination is come to on the point. It should be remembered that circumstances have altered very much since the standard

^*See discussion on the South Metropolitan Gas Bill, 6th March, 1900 (page 189 of this Volume).

price was fixed, and if the standard price is altered, it is quite possible that the standard dividends will also have to be altered. I am rather surprised that the hon. Member for West Islington should have brought forward the matter again to-day. I understood that he had accepted the view of the House on the South Metropolitan Gas Company's Bill, which was discussed the other day, when words were inserted similar to those which I am moving now. I think, if he will agree to the insertion of the words I have to propose, the matter may be allowed to go before a Committee in whose wisdom and fairness we can trust.

said he wished to second the Amendment of his hon. friend. He hoped the House would accept it, emanating as it did from the Chairman of the Select Committee which considered the subject last year.

said the speech of the hon. Baronet was mainly directed against the recommendations of the Select Committee, but it was too late to take up that ground now, because he himself was not only Chairman of the Committee, but had also concurred in its recommendations. The hon. Baronet said that the recommendations were too stringent and that the company had a right to be heard. But the company had been already heard, and the effect of the Amendment would be to re-open the whole question. That was a prospect which Mould appal the ratepayers of London, because, directly or indirectly, the expense of another prolonged inquiry would fall on them. In the memorandum which had been issued in connection with the Bill there was a reference to him which was inaccurate, and which he wished to contradict. It was stated that the Committee was appointed in 1898, but that it did not commence work that year because of the action of Mr. Pickersgill in moving to widen the scope of the inquiry. That statement was absolutely inaccurate.

said he did not think the responsibility for the statement rested with him, but as far as he might have been responsible he entirely withdrew it.

said that the Committee was only appointed a few weeks before Parliament was prorogued in 1898, and it was absolutely impossible that it could have proceeded with the inquiry that year. It was true that in the following year he did propose an Amendment making the Instruction more specific. In that Amendment he anticipated the objection which the company now advanced, namely, that they had no specific notice that the Committee would consider whether or not the statutory conditions as to the price of gas and the dividend should be revised. The Government declined to accept that Amendment, and he then stated that he would not press it, and that he threw on the Government the responsibility of declining to take a step which would make the inquiry really beneficial.^* If that Amendment had been carried the company would have had specific notice, and there would have been no ground whatever for the objection now raised. The House, not having accepted that Amendment, would now, he was afraid, be bound to assent to the Amendment of the hon. Baronet.

The remarks of the hon. Member who has just sat down were, I think, more interesting to himself than to the House. The main question that is to be decided now is really the same question that was decided the other day in connection with another Bill, and I should have thought that the hon. Member for West Islington would have immediately accepted the Amendment of my hon. friend and have obviated any further discussion. The hon. Member for South-west Bethnal Green appeals to the recommendations of the Select Committee on Metropolitan Gas Companies, but the chairman of that Committee is the hon. Member who has moved the Amendment now before the House, and I have no doubt that in doing so he voices the views of that Committee. The recommendations of the Committee were never in-

^*See The Parliamentary Debates (Fourth Series], Vol. lxviii., p. 423.

tended to be dealt with by the House on the Second Reading of a Bill, but to be considered by the Committee to which the Bill was referred, and it would be unwise for the House to commit itself to the ipsissima verba of this Instruction without hearing evidence. I hope the Amendment to the Instruction will be accepted, and that the Instruction will go to the Committee, not as a mandatory Instruction, but as an indication from the House that the recommendations should be considered if that course is deemed advisable.

said, as a member of the Select Committee, he hoped the House would accept the Amendment of the hon. Baronet. It would be a very dangerous proceeding to lay down that any recommendation made by a Select Committee on questions connected with Private Bill matters, which, though it had heard evidence, had not heard parties by counsel, should be necessarily binding on all parties concerned when they tried to obtain a private Bill.

said he was quite sure he would not be accused of not being in sympathy with the recommendations of the Select Committee, because it was on his motion that the Committee was appointed. He was glad that the hon. Member for South-west Bethnal Green now saw that his action last year was not to the advantage of the consumers.

I said directly the reverse.

said he was sorry that even yet the hon. Member did not realise that his action last year was not to the advantage of the consumers. He had very little sympathy with the Gas Light and Coke Company, whose want of management had been abundantly proved before the Select Committee, but it was to the interest of consumers that the company should be given fair play. If the company were allowed to say all it had to say before the Select Committee, he was quite sure that the wisdom and necessity of nearly all the recommendations of last year's Committee would be established, and safeguards would be inserted in the Bill in the interests of the too long suffering consumers. There was another reason for not making the Instruction a mandatory Instruction. The London County Council—a body which could not be accused of any sympathy with the company, or want of sympathy with the consumers—had recommended another arrangement which would be brought before the Committee, and the Committee would be able to decide what was just in the interests of consumers in North London, and also what was just to the company.

thought the recommendation of the Committee that the principle of a sliding scale should be adopted was a clear and definite notice to gas companies of the views entertained by the House. Although he did not go so far as some hon. Members with regard to the alleged mismanagement of the Gas Light and Coke Company, there was the strange anomaly that on the south side of the Thames the charge was one-third less than on the north side, and that the South Metropolitan Gas Company was subject to the same price of 3s. 3d. now sought to be imposed on the Gas Light and Coke Company. He sincerely hoped the recommendation would be carried.

explained that the reason why he had not included the suggested Amendment was that there were certain technical difficulties in the way. He strongly supported the view that this particular company had treated London very badly, and was in a somewhat different position from that of the South Metropolitan Company. Therefore, though his judgment was entirely in favour of accepting the suggestion of the President of the Board of Trade, he left himself in the hands of the House with regard to the Amendment. As to the remarks of the hon. Member for South-west Bethnal Given, he assured the hon. Gentleman that nothing was further from his intention than to make any reflection on what he had done; the words were intended to be most complimentary.

asked whether he would be in order in moving that the Report, of the Select Committee on Metropolitan Gas Companies, with the minutes of evidence, be referred to the Committee by whom this Bill would be considered.

It would be necessary to give notice, but it is really a question for the Chairman of the Committee.

Is it in order now to move that this Bill be referred to the same Committee as the South Metropolitan Gas Company's Bill?

No.

reminded the House that the object of the appointment of this Committee was to prevent different decisions emanating from Private Bill Committees upon matters within the category referred to. That object had not been very well served. The quorum was so small that a very limited number of members appeared to guide the decisions of the Committee, and those decisions were frequently not in the direction contemplated when the Committee was appointed. The Committee of Selection should exercise great care in appointing members of this Committee, in order that the House and the public interest might be protected against such results as often occurred. He hoped the Instruction meant what it said—

It is not in order to refer to that part of the motion; I have not yet put the Instruction.

Very well; I will simply ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be well to defer making this appointment until he has conferred with the Committee of Selection as to the best means of achieving the object he has in view.

replied that the question was really one for the Committee of Selection. It rested with that Committee to select men who would attend, and the Committee appeared to have done their work, onerous though it was, in a very satisfactory manner.

:, as a member of the Police and Sanitary Committee for six years, testified to the usefulness of the work done by the Committee. Uniformity of decisions was secured so far as the nature of the case permitted. Errors had no doubt been committed, but all Committees made mistakes from time to time. The general result had been highly beneficial to the public service, and as the Committee gained experience those beneficial results would doubtless increase.

asked whether it was the case that this Committee differed from other Private Bill Committees in that a declaration of having no interest was not required of members, nor had they to declare that they had been present and heard the evidence before they voted. If that was the case, it was a very serious question, and the House ought to consider whether the Committee should not be brought into line with other Private Bill Committees.

, as Chairman of the Committee of Selection, stated that that Committee endeavoured to exercise the greatest care in the choice of members for all Committees. With regard to this particular Committee, there was very great difficulty in getting members to serve, inasmuch as the work was so exceedingly arduous. The House, sooner or later, would have to consider whether some system could not be adopted by which the work of the Police and Sanitary Committee would be lightened.

asked whether it was the case that the members of this Committee, which differed very little from a Private Bill Committee, were required to make a declaration of having no interests, and whether it was also necessary for them to make a declaration that they had been present and heard the evidence before giving their vote?

The answer is, No.

said that although there was no law prohibiting a Member having private interests sitting on such a Committee, there was a public feeling against such action. It so happened that he had been chairman of the Committee when dealing with a Sanitary Bill promoted by a borough in which he had private interests, and resigned the chair because he had large interests in a borough the Bill for which would necessarily occupy a great part of the session. The principle could be earned too far. For instance, in regard to Railway Bills, it would entirely weaken Committees on Railway Bills if no one could serve on such a Committee except those who had no interest in the railway. He granted that this was a most valuable Instruction. It had sometimes appeared in the Orders of the House and sometimes not; but he hoped it would always appear henceforth, and that when it did appear it would be effectually carried out, and that the reasons would be given at greater length than hitherto, and in an intelligible form. He also hoped that the Reports of the Committee would be available to Members at the earliest possible moment. He had only to express his hope that reasons would be given intelligibly, so that the House might exercise supervision over the Committee.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the Boer prisoners confined on board ship at Cape Town and other places have suffered severely and for long periods from sea sickness; and whether, under these circumstances, the Government will arrange to relieve those prisoners of this punishment by removing them to a place of safe keeping on shore.

Before my hon. friend answers that question, may I ask whether there is any foundation for the statement that prisoners belonging to the Cape and Natal forces are subject to special indignities at Pretoria, and are confined in the common gaol?

Order, order! That does not arise out of the question on the Paper. The hon. Member must give notice of his question.

There is no information at the War Office to this effect. The disposal of the prisoners is under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the artillery of the Eighth Division are now fully mobilised at Aldershot, and have received their uniform and equipment; and whether they are to accompany the Division to South Africa; and, if not, what is the cause of this decision.

The answer to the first paragraph is, Yes. The batteries will not, under present arrangements, proceed to South Africa, as the military authorities both at home and in South Africa agree that they are not required.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the military authorities on the northern frontier of the Cape Colony have referred home on the subject of the writ of habeas corpus, of which they have accepted service, returnable to the High Court at Cape Town on the 12th March; and whether in any case instructions will be given to obey the writ by bringing up the three persons named therein for judgment to the High Court at Cape Town.

The military authorities having accepted service of the writ, the Secretary of State has no doubt that they will duly appear at the proper time.

Has any inquiry been made?

I am not aware whether any inquiry has been made. Service having been accepted, things will take their natural course.

May I ask my hon. friend whether he is not aware that there has been a delay in answering this question, and, if it has not been for the purpose of making inquiry, why has it occurred?

The only delay I know of is that I asked my right hon. friend for my own convenience to postpone this question from Tuesday until to-day.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the statement, published some time since and verified by the signature of the writer, to the effect that about last September a gentleman offered to secure for the Government the refusal of 15,000 Basuto ponies at a low price; and, if so, was his offer declined.

The statement to which the hon. Member refers is, I presume, the letter which appeared in The Times of the 9th January, over the signature of Lieutenant-Colonel Allsopp. The writer stated that he had been offered 15,000 Basuto ponies at £15 apiece, and inquired what the War Office had done in the matter. The Secretary of State's attention was called to this letter, and he at once wrote to Lieutenant-Colonel Allsopp, asking to be referred to the person by whom the offer was made. Colonel Allsopp referred Lord Lansdowne to a gentleman of the name of Pardy as the person who made the offer. Mr. Pardy was thereupon asked whether he could supply 15,000 Basuto ponies, or a smaller number, and at what rate. He replied that he was prepared to proceed at once to Pondoland and Basutoland, and, "if sufficiently backed by the Government, to procure all the available horses." Funds were to be placed at his disposal, and he was to receive the honorary rank of major and pay at the rate of £60 a month. But he was unable to produce any evidence to show that horses of the right stamp were actually available. Mr. Pardy has since addressed a communication to the War Office explaining that Colonel Allsopp's letter conveyed an erroneous impression, as his only offer was to go to South Africa as the agent of Her Majesty's Government, trusting that his knowledge of the country would enable him to pick up a considerable number of ponies at reasonable rates. Mr. Pardy's offer was not accepted. I may explain that long before the appearance of Colonel Allsopp's letter inquiries had been made in South Africa as to the possibility of buying Basuto ponies. Reports, however, from the General Officer Commanding at the Cape and from the Resident Commissioner in Basutoland were to the effect that ponies of the proper class were unobtainable.

May I ask whether it is not the duty of the Intelligence Department of the War Office to make themselves acquainted with what horses are available in the different parts of the Empire?

That is exactly what the Intelligence Department did.

Is Mr. Pardy a Birmingham man?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the censor of news in South Africa is a military or civil officer, under what authority military or civil and under whose instructions he acts, what correspondence telegraphic and postal is submitted to his examination, and whether all such examination takes place in South Africa.

The censorship in South Africa is exorcised by military officers acting under the authority of the Field Marshal commanding the forces. It is not desirable to give information as to the manner in which it is exercised.

On behalf of the hon. Member for the Rushcliffe Division of Nottingham, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War with what person lies the primary responsibility for the system of censorship and suppression now exercised in the South African colonies over telegrams from abroad, under what authority it is exercised, at what date commenced, and by whom the actual duty of inspecting such telegrams is performed; and whether there is or has been any similar system with respect to letters or other documents passing through the Post Office to the Cape Colony or Natal, and in that case under what authority it is exercised.

The responsibility for the censorship rests with Her Majesty's Government, several Departments of which are concerned. It is exercised under Articles VII. and VIII. of the International Telegraph Convention. It com- menced in October and it is carried out by specially appointed military officers. It is not desirable to make known particulars with regard to the manner in which the censorship is exercised.

Does the hon. Gentleman give us to understand that the responsibility for the censorship lies with the Field Marshal commanding the forces, or that it lies with Her Majesty's Government? Is it a military or a civil responsibility?

Perhaps the hon. Member will be good enough to understand precisely what I expressed by the answer which I have just given and by the answer which I gave to him.

May I point out to the hon. Gentleman that the reason—

Order, order! The hon. Gentleman is not in order in giving his reasons for asking the question.

The hon. Member rebuked me.

I have just stated that it is not desirable to make known the manner in which the censorship is exercised.

Is one of the censors Lord Stanley, a Government Whip?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he can furnish the designations of the various colonial regiments now serving in South Africa, and say under whose command each regiment is.

The information is not at the disposal of the War Office, but an effort will be made to obtain it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what pay the men of the new Australian force now being raised at the request of Her Majesty's Government are to receive.

These men will receive pay at ordinary British rates, with special local allowances according to the conditions under which they may be called upon to serve.

:May I ask the hon. Gentleman if there is any truth in the statement which has been made that some of these Australian troops are to receive 5s. a day.

The truth is in the answer given to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he will state who was responsible for the appointment of the man Headly as veterinary surgeon on board the steamship "Kent," which is conveying the Bedfordshire contingent of Imperial Yeomanry to South Africa; and whether he is aware; that Headly proved to have no diploma as a qualified veterinary surgeon, no drugs, and no instruments, and that four horses died on the voyage, between England and Madeira, of stoppage of water, because he was unable to perform the ordinary operation for their relief.

The responsibility for the appointment lies with the Yeomanry Committee. The selection of this person, who was certainly not qualified for the position, appears to have been due to an unfortunate confusion of identity. There was a full supply of veterinary drugs and instruments on board, placed there by the Army Veterinary Department.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War when does the Government intend to mobilise the Militia Artillery, and for what length of time; and are the Militia Artillery to be paid on the same scale as when they are called out for their usual annual training.

I am not yet able to give precise information in answer to the first question. The Militia Artillery will on embodiment be paid like regular Artillery.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the second part of the question?

I have done so.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War by whose authority, and under what law or regulation, a cablegram, sent on 14th February to a newspaper at Cape Town, recording the proceedings of a conference held at the Westminster Palace Hotel on that day, and including a resolution of sympathy with the Cape and Natal Ministries, has been stopped by the censor at Cape Town.

:No information has reached this office that such a telegram was stopped at Cape Town or elsewhere.

I shall put a further question on the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is proposed to ask Australia, Canada, or any of the colonies to bear any portion of the cost of the present war, or whether all the expenses of military operations are to be paid solely by the taxpayers of Great Britain and Ireland.

Is it proposed to give to Australia, Canada, or any of the colonies 103 representatives in the House of Commons?

If the hon. Member will refer to Command Paper 18, presented in November last, he will find, at page 6, the information he desires with regard to the charges falling on Canada and the Australasian colonies.

Are we to understand that the colonies will bear no portion of the £60,000,000?

They are contributing towards their own forces.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say that some arrangement should be considered whereby each portion of the Empire should pay towards the cost, and not leave it all to fall on the unfortunate taxpayers of this country?

Order, order!

If Australia does not pay I don't see why Ireland should.

:I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, having regard to the services rendered to the Empire by the Indian and Colonial troops now serving in South Africa, he will recommend that Her Most Gracious Majesty should create a body of Imperial Guards, who should technically form the bodyguards of Her Majesty's representatives in India and the Colonies.

:The Secretary of State is not prepared to make such a recommendation at present.

:I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in consideration of the conduct of the Irish soldiers in the present war, he will advise Her Most Gracious Majesty to allow a regiment to bear the title of the Royal Irish Guards; and whether, under these circumstances, Her Most Gracious Majesty would be pleased to confer the first colonelcy on Lord Roberts.

In answer to my hon. friend, I have to say that a proposal dealing with the subject referred to in his question has been under the consideration of the War Office, and it will be laid before Her Majesty, and will, I have no doubt, receive favourable consideration.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War when the Return as to Government contracts will be presented which was ordered by the House on 16th February last.

The Return will be presented immediately. The Return was ordered on the 27th ultimo.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the direct commissions being offered to young men from the universities, public shools, and colonies will confer seniority over cadets at present receiving military instruction in the Royal Military Academy and Royal Military College; and whether the Secretary of State will consider the propriety of ante-dating the commissions of such cadets when they receive them, so that they may not be superseded by officers who have entered the Army without having received any preliminary instruction.

:The direct commissions offered to universities and colonies will not be given to candidates under the age of twenty, who will thus be in most cases senior in age to the cadets leaving the Royal Military Academy and Royal Military College. Any special measures adopted to meet the abnormal requirements of the present moment must necessarily produce to a certain extent results of the kind to which the hon. Member's question points. To antedate the commissions would do more harm than good, as it would lead to the super-session of those actually serving.

Has it not been often done by cadets who have passed the higher examinations going out to higher positions and superseding those already serving in the Army?

I must ask for notice of that.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he will state, with regard to the sixteen battalions shown at page three of his Memorandum on the Army Estimates to have been in June last in Egypt and the colonies, how many were in Egypt, how many in the self-governing colonies, and how many in Crown colonies and other dependencies.

There were in June last three battalions in Egypt, two in self-governing colonies and eleven and a half in Crown colonies and other dependencies.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he can state the number of horses purchased for the Army in Ireland during the last year; and whether, in view of the number of Irish horses suitable for Army purposes, he will see that at least a fair proportion of the War Office orders for horses are placed in Ireland.

The number of horses purchased in Ireland during the last twelve months is 4,746. Every effort is made—

No, no! No effort at all.

Every effort is made to obtain horses for the Army in Ireland, but trained horses of suitable ages are very difficult to obtain there.

Is it not the fact that no agents whatever are appointed to purchase horses in the south of Ireland?

It is not necessary. The Remount Department is sufficiently strong for all purposes of purchase.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many of the horses purchased in Austria were got out of sires sent out of Ireland for that purpose?

Can the hon. Gentleman say what proportion of the total of horses he mentioned was purchased in Munster?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether both the commanding officer and the second in command of the 3rd Dragoon Guards have at the same time been away From their regiment on remount duty, and, if so, for how long they have been away and in what countries, and whether they are still absent from their regiment; whether it is usual for the military authorities to deprive a cavalry regiment of the services of its two senior commanding officers at the same time, and if not, why they have done so in the present instance; and whether such a course is detrimental to the efficiency of the regiment.

:Both the officers referred to have been absent for nearly five months from their regiment on special employment, but only the second in command abroad. It is unusual thus to deprive a regiment of its two senior officers; but the circumstances are unusual and it has been necessary to make the best arrangements possible for obtaining horses and mules, of which between 60,000 and 70,000 have been landed in South Africa.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the Government railway siding near the Ordnance Store at Aldershot has no roof or covering of any description; and that many thousands of soldiers entrained at this siding during the last few months on their way to embark at Southampton for South Africa; whether, on many occasions, the soldiers were exposed to the rain on this siding, and had to embark in wet clothes, to the injury of their health; and whether he will make provision for the erection of a roof or covering to this siding.

It is true that the siding has no roof or covering. An estimate of the cost of erecting a roof has been called for, and I hope it will be possible to remedy this deficiency without delay.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether all retired officers who have volunteered their services to fill vacancies in the Auxiliary forces must first be nominated and recommended by some commanding officer having such vacancies; whether the commanding officers have at their disposal any list of the names of officers who have thus volunteered, and whether the officers who have volunteered have any means of knowing which commanding officers have vacancies; and whether a list of regiments in the Auxiliary forces having vacancies could be sent to the depôts of all regimental districts.

The reply to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. In regard to the second paragraph, commanding officer's keep lists of candidates. Candidates can ascertain by easy reference to the Monthly Army List what vacancies exist. In regard to the third paragraph, as the officers commanding regimental districts are already well aware of the vacancies existing in their command, the list suggested is unnecessary.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that for some years past, ever since the introduction of the Lee-Metford rifle, three battalions of Volunteers, one battalion of Militia, and a regiment of Yeomanry in Gloucestershire have been unable to practise rifle shooting in such a manner as would enable them to become efficient or useful marksmen on service; whether he is aware that the War Office have hitherto refused to give any assistance towards the establishment of a proper range; and whether, in view of recent events in South Africa, there is any prospect of the Government now seeing their way to reconsider their decision.

I am aware that some of the Volunteer corps in Gloucestershire have had considerable difficulties in regard to their rifle practice. It is hoped that with the additional funds now at his disposal for this purpose the Secretary of State for War will be able to give Volunteer corps greater assistance in obtaining range accommodation. The distribution of the sum is now under consideration.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether there is any prospect of the Government holding out additional inducements to Volunteers, in shape of personal allowance, so as to enable them to attend a camp or school of instruction for such periods as are really calculated to increase their efficiency.

The points referred to will, as foreshadowed in the Secretary of State's Memorandum on the Army Estimates, not be lost sight of.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War when the new regulations in regard to attendance at camps will be issued for Volunteers; and if he can hold out hopes of giving assistance towards the building of drill halls for companies not headquarter companies.

The whole question of assistance to Volunteer corps for camps and other purposes is under consideration, and it is not possible to reply at present to the right hon. Member's question.

:I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for war whether it is intended to re-arm the Volunteer position artillery, armed at present with old-fashioned 20 and 40-pounders, with the 4·7 guns; and whether the Government will consider the advisability of giving a special boot grant to Volunteer corps, in order that the men may appear provided with the regulation boot when called up on mobilisation.

A certain number of Volun- teer position batteries will be armed with 4·7 guns. The answer to the right hon. Member for the Honiton Division of Devonshire covers the second paragraph of this question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the Government intend aiding Volunteer corps to provide suitable armouries and drill halls for drilling at night in the winter and spring months, thereby increasing the efficiency of the force; and whether the Government could see their way to allowing Volunteer officers with previous service in the Militia and Yeomanry to count such service towards earning the Volunteer officers' decoration.

I will have the suggestion contained in the second paragraph considered, but it has been suggested to me that it would impair the value of the Volunteer decoration if service in any other part of Her Majesty's forces was allowed to count towards earning it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he can state whether the regulations permit a Militiaman to purchase his discharge for the sum of £1, and then, presuming he is otherwise eligible, to join a Royal Reserve battalion, which renders him liable for one year's home service only, and obtain for that year's service the sum of £22 in addition to his daily pay.

All discharges by purchase from Militia units, whether embodied or not, have been suspended until further orders.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state the rate of wages now being paid for unskilled labour by engineering firms within the area of the county of London engaged upon contract work for the Government.

I cannot state the rate of wages.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether any general instructions have been issued by the Government of India to be lenient in collecting the land revenue from cultivators in the districts affected by famine; and whether he is aware that in the Alibagh district of Bombay special promptitude in payment is being enforced, and that an unusually large number of notices have been issued to defaulters at a cost to them of four annas for each notice.

:The famine codes lay down that the collector, in the early stages of a famine, is to consider the question of suspending the land revenue in distressed tracts, and empower him to grant such suspensions of his own authority. I have received no information to the effect suggested in the hon. Member's second question.

Will the noble Lord make inquiry?

I hardly think it is necessary.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to a recent circular of the Government of India in the Educational Department, under which unaided schools are required to make use of text books approved by the Director of Public Instruction under penalty of the exclusion of their pupils from public examinations; whether he has sanctioned this new departure; and whether he will state what advantage is obtained from limiting the free choice of text books by schools receiving no grant from Government.

The resolution of the Government of India, to which the hon. Member refers, has not yet come before me officially for sanction, though I am officially cognisant of its contents. It is there stated that in the opinion of the Government of India the State, while it does not undertake to prescribe text books for unaided schools, is justified in excluding from the examinations for certificates and for Government scholarships the pupils of schools which use test books disapproved by Government, and that this is done on the ground that the State has a direct interest in the course of instruction given in all schools, whether aided financially by the State or not.

:I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the two Native Indian regiments to be borne on the Estimates are existing regiments at present forming part of the Native Army in India, or are they to be raised in India by the British Government.

The regiments form part of the existing Indian Army.

Will the Home Government pay the capitation grant to the Government of India?

I must ask for notice of that.

:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether upon the recommendation of the Premier of Western Australia, the Australian colonies are considering the payment of a grant of £20,000 from the public revenues towards the relief of sufferers from the famine in India; and whether any decision has been arrived at in reference to this suggestion.

I have received no information on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received representations as to the grievances under which the inhabitants of the Goldfields districts of Western Australia allege they are labouring; whether he is aware that they complain in particular of the unfair distribution of political power, 5,674 electors in the mining constituency of East Coolgardie returning only one member, while 5,650 electors in the pastoral districts return twenty-one members; and whether he contemplates any action with a view to removing such grievances and putting an end to the discontent that now prevails on the Western Australian Goldfields.

The Rev. Mr. O'Gorman, who has been delegated by the inhabitants of the Goldfields districts, has personally made a representation to my Department on the subject of the grievances of the Goldfields districts of Western Australia. He has been requested to put his representations in writing, in order that they may be communicated to the Government of the colony for consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies when the arrangement made by the Colonial Government of Jamaica concerning the Jamaica Railway will be completed and the debentures exchanged for Colonial stock, as undertaken by the Colonial Government of that colony.

The arrangements are so far completed that as soon as the decision of the Court in Jamaica has been given, which is now being awaited, the debentures will be exchanged for Colonial stock.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the office of the Crown Agents for the Colonies execute orders for the government of the Windward Islands; and whether any commission is paid to such office on such orders; and, if so, from what source is this commission paid.

Yes, Sir: the Crown Agents for the Colonies execute order's for the three Colonial Governments which constitute the Windward Islands; those Governments, like those of all other Crown colonies, pay to their office a commission of 1 per cent. on all stores supplied through them under arrangements which have been in force since 1886.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government will actively co-operate with the United States Government in the endeavour to arrive at an agreement between the Powers interested in China which will secure equal opportunities for the trade of all nations throughout the Chinese Empire, irrespective of any territorial changes that may take place.

Papers on this subject will shortly be laid before the House.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the opening of Nanning Fu as a treaty port, as announced by Her Majesty's Government early last year, has been carried out; and, if not, what steps are being taken to enforce this; and whether Her Majesty's Government will insist on the opening of the inland waterways of China in accordance with the agreement under which British ships were to be able to take British goods to every riverside town and station.

Her Majesty's Minister at Peking has repeatedly pressed the Chinese Government to carry out the opening of Nanning. They still await the report of the Governor of the province on the arrangements that will be necessary, but have promised Sir C. MacDonald to direct him to send it in without delay. The navigation of the inland waters by British vessels has been successfully initiated in various parts of China. The papers shortly to be laid before the House will show that considerable progress has been made. Her Majesty's Minister at Peking will continue to give careful attention to the matter.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the office of the Crown Agents for the Colonies is receiving any commission or percentage on the value of material of any kind shipped for construction of the Uganda Railway; and whether any commission or percentage is paid on freight of said material; if so, what is the rate per cent., and what is the total amount paid to date.

The office of the Crown Agents for the Colonies receives a commission of 1 per cent. on the cost of all materials and stores shipped by them for the Uganda Railway. Freight, being a part of the cost, is charged with this commission. The total amount paid as commission since 1896 up to date is £15,090 18s. 7d.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs by what line of steamers the material for construction of Cape to Cairo telegraph has been conveyed to Chinde.

:This is not a Government undertaking, and we have no knowledge of the methods employed for sending out the material in question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the increase in the estimated amount receivable from fees by suitors in county courts in the next financial year implies that there are to be no considerable reductions made in the rate of fees receivable in county courts.

No, Sir.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is yet in a position to announce if the postal regulations will be so modified that the cable companies may telephone to their clients cablegrams received after business hours, and that the addressees may telephone replies for transmission by submarine cable, without being subjected to the delay involved in sending such messages through the Post Office.

The Postmaster General hopes to secure the co-operation of the American cable companies in an experimental arrangement made to expedite the delivery of cable messages at Liverpool. Between the hours of 8 and 9 or 9.30 p.m. such messages will be telephoned direct from the Exchange Post Office, which immediately adjoins the offices of the four American cable companies, to those addressees who are subscribers to the system of the National Telephone Company, and the subscribers will also be able to telephone their replies direct to the Exchange Post Office. This arrangement will save the time hitherto occupied in conveying messages by hand between the offices of the cable companies at the Exchange and the head post office, and it will be made permanent should the use made of it prove sufficient to justify such a course.

:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether a memorial has been received calling attention to the stagnation of promotion in the telegraph department; and whether a revision of the staff is in contemplation; and, if so, whether it is the intention to make additional superior appointments to relieve the pressure at a maximum.

The Postmaster General has not received any general memorial to this effect from the telegraph staff of the Department. If the hon. Member refers to the staff of some particular office, perhaps he will mention the name of the office.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, has the Monaghan post office been condemned as insanitary; have the postmaster and his family been obliged owing to considerations of health to leave the post office and take up their residence in another portion of the town; is he aware that the excessive prevalence of sickness at present in Monaghan is generally attributed to the distribution of infection from this centre of disease; has the Department invited offers of sites for the erection of a new post office, and have any offers been received; and when may the public of Monaghan hope to be relieved from the growing danger which menaces them in the existence of the present post office.

The post office premises have not been condemned as insanitary. The postmaster, to whom they belong, has been allowed to give up living in them because they are small and more room is required for the duties. The post office is not a centre of infection. On the contrary, the official records show that the health of the staff is distinctly above the average. Offers of sites for a new office have been invited, but as yet none have been received. It is impossible, therefore, to state when the present office can be abandoned.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the Limerick Harbour Commissioners have paid all instalments of interest and principal due to the Irish Board of Works up to date; whether the amount of the loan from the Board of Works has been reduced by £35,480, and the expenditure of the Commissioners is kept well under their revenue; if so, whether he can say on what special grounds the Board of Works warned the Harbour Commissioners not to incur expense in opposing the Great Southern and Western Railway Companies Amalgamation Bill; and whether he will see that the Board of Works do not further interfere to prevent the Harbour Commissioners taking any action they deem proper in the exercise of their constitutional rights to influence Parliament concerning the Railways Amalgamation Bill now awaiting its decision.

The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. The amount of the loans due to the Board of Works has been reduced by £26,517 10s. (not £35,480). The expenditure of the Harbour Commissioners has in recent times been kept under the revenue. But I may remind the hon. Member that in 1868 loans to the Commissioners were remitted to the extent of £58,863 principal and £46,803 interest. The Board of Works cannot prevent the Harbour Commissioners from incurring this expenditure if it is legal. If it is illegal they are, of course, bound to protect their own interest. Their action has no other motive.

Will the light hon. Gentleman receive a deputation from the Commissioners?

The Board of Works are offering no opposition and no encouragement to the Bill; they are standing neutral.

Has not the Board of Works sent a letter warning these people not to incur further expense in opposing the Bill in this House unless they get permission to do so?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Irish Board of Works have taken any steps recently, and, if so, when, and what action to compel the Great Southern and Western Railway Company to make the new railways from Rosslare to Waterford and from Fermoy to Cork, authorised by the Fish guard and Rosslare Railways and Harbours Act, 1897, and which railways the company undertook in 1897 to construct without postponement; and whether the Treasury, on the advice of the Board of Works, agreed to cancel a large debt on the understanding such railways would be forthwith made.

As this question did not appear upon the Paper till this morning I can only say that I am not aware of any such steps. Moreover, while Parliament fixed a limit of time for the construction of the railways in question, it did not, so far as I know, impose upon the Treasury and the Board of Works the duty of hastening their construction. As the hon. Member will see from the schedule to the Fishguard and Rosslare Railways and Harbours Act, 1898, the debt owed by the Fishguard Company is not to be cancelled. It will be discharged by a payment of a sum of £93,000. An equivalent grant of the same amount has been promised to be paid in two instalments as the works proceed.

Have the works in Wexford been commenced at all?

I understand that they have.

No.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that, since the passing of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894, many parishes have ceased to publish to their ratepayers a list of paupers and details of intromissions; and whether, in ceasing to publish these particulars, these parishes are complying with the wish of the Local Government Board.

The reply to the first paragraph of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. The Board, I am informed, have frequently urged upon parochial boards and parish councils the advisability of printing lists of the paupers on their rolls, but they have no power to enforce compliance.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate is it the purpose of the Local Government Board to require publicity to be given to the accounts of parish trusts, as contemplated under Section 30 (7) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894.

The circumstances of the various trusts are so diverse that great difficulty arises inframing such an order as is contemplated in the section referred to, but the matter has not been lost sight of.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture what have been the amounts of expenditure charged upon estates under the several Improvement of Land Acts and Limited Owners' Residences Acts for (a) farm buildings; (b) labourers' cottages; (c) mansion houses, etc., in the years 1895, 1896, 1897, 1898, and 1899, respectively.

The amounts of the expenditure which have been charged under the Improvement of Land Acts and Limited Owners' Residences Acts during each of the last five years for the purposes to which the hon. Member refers have been as follows:—Farm buildings, £49,326, £66,875, £58,382, £48,119, and £43,241; labourers' cottages, £9,535, £10,126, £8,861, £11,691, and £18,306; mansion houses, etc., £28,736, £58,533, £34,208, £9,629, and £22,906.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he can state when he hopes to be able to withdraw the muzzling order now in force in the county of Carmarthen.

I am not yet in a position to name a date for the withdrawal of the muzzling order now in force in certain portions of Carmarthenshire, Breconshire, and Glamorganshire, but the position is much improved, no case of rabies having been discovered in the scheduled district since the 10th November last. I hope, therefore, that it may not be necessary to keep the order in force for any very prolonged period.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that in different parts of the country public meetings have been broken up and assaults committed on many of Her Majesty's subjects in consequence of their political opinions; and whether, if it should appear to him that the police force of any county or borough have been remiss in the performance of their duty of protecting the parsons and property of the people, he will regard such conduct as justifying him in withholding his certificate of the efficiency of such police force.

I have received no complaints of such occurrences as are referred to in the first paragraph. It is impossible to answer categorically the hypothetical question in the second paragraph. Of course if habitual remissness on the part of the police in protecting persons and property were proved to have existed, it would be an element in considering whether or not the force could be certified as efficient.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the recent riots in Stratford-on-Avon, and to the statement of Mr. H. H. Bullar that his house was invaded by a mob, who broke the windows and damaged or completely destroyed his whole stock of old china and antique furniture; and what steps are being taken by the Government to protect peaceable citizens from such proceedings.

The question only appeared on the Paper this morning. I will make inquiry into the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Sysons v. Knowles and Sons, Limited, by which it is decided that in order to come within the benefit of the Workmen's Compensation Act, the applicant must have been at the time of the accident in the master's employment for at least two weeks; and whether, having regard to the effects of this decision, he will introduce, or will support, a Bill to amend the Act in this respect.

The decision appears to me to be of such importance that I should like time to consider the matter and put it before my colleagues before I answer the question.

:I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state approximately the amounts paid at the custom houses in the United Kingdom on Saturday and Monday in anticipation of the extra duties to be imposed by the Budget, and whether it would be praticable in future years to prevent or diminish such anticipatory payments by making it a condition that the new or additional duties should be surcharged on all payments made between the announcement of the date of the Budget and the passing of the Budget resolutions.

It is not possible to give an exact figure, but the payments in the two days will, I expect, amount to about two and a quarter millions, whereas under ordinary conditions they would average about £180,000. I quite agree with the suggestion that some steps should be taken to diminish or prevent the loss of revenue caused by these large anticipatory payments, but I am afraid the actual plan suggested by the Hon. Member would not quite meet the case. It is not always possible, when a man has once cleared goods at the lower rate, to recover a surcharge. But I am carefully considering the subject, and hope to be able before the Committee stage of the Finance Bill to make some definite proposal for dealing with the matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman let us know the names, so that we may know whether we are getting their goods cheaper in consequence?

These goods are often—in fact, I may say generally—cleared, not by the persons who retail them, but by wholesale dealers.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is proposed that the new stamp duty on produce contracts shall apply to all descriptions of produce, including sugar, cotton, corn, provisions, and iron; whether it will be levied on both spot and future transactions; whether it will apply to all sales through the medium of a broker, either off or on a produce exchange; and whether sales between principals without the intervention of a broker will be free from the said duty.

The answer to all four paragraphs of the question is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, under the terms of the Budget resolution passed on Tuesday last, it is contemplated that all trade contracts negotiated between principals by an intermediate broker or agent shall become liable to the new stamp duty, and, if not so contemplated, whether he will insert words expressly to exclude such contracts.

The intention is that the new stamp duty should be attracted by the advice note sent to his principal by "any person carrying on the business of a broker" advising him of the sale or purchase of any goods. The contracts resulting from the brokers' negotiations will not attract the duty.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly consent to see in his private room one or two gentlemen who will explain the serious effect this will have on the cotton trade of Manchester?

I am about to receive a deputation on the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the promise he has made to consider any restrictions preventing the growth of tobacco in Ireland, and to endeavour to remove them, he will also endeavour to remove the restrictive conditions preventing the growth of sugar in England, Scotland, and Ireland generally, should the experiments now in progress prove that without the restrictive conditions referred to sugar beet would be a large and profitable crop for the farmers of this country.

I am not aware of any restrictive conditions on the growth of sugar in the United Kingdom.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the effect of the arrangements made by the Departmental Committee appointed under the minute of 4th July, 1899, and named in the Education Department's Return of 12th February, 1900, will be to leave in the hands of the Science and Art Department the regulation of the conditions under which grants for science, art, and technology may be earned by secondary schools; and whether any further steps have been taken to give effect to the undertaking of the Government to establish a third branch of the Education Department to deal with the special interests of secondary schools.

The conditions under which science and art grants are paid to secondary schools are regulated by the Committee of Council, and will after April 1st be regulated by the Board of Education. Grants for technical instruction were suspended in Great Britain, but not in Ireland, in 1891. The conditions in Ireland are at present regulated by the Committee of Council. The arrangements for establishing a third branch of the Board of Education are still under consideration.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland if the Belfast Borough Act, 8 and 9 Vic. c. 142, Section 21, requiring the council to cause an annual account in abstract to be prepared, showing the total receipts and expenditure of all funds levied by virtue of this Act ending 31st December, has been complied with by transmitting a copy of same to the town clerk of the borough on or before 31st January following in each year, under a forfeit of £20, and is he aware that a levy of rates has been made for the quarter ending 31st March, 1900, and again for the year ending 31st March, 1901, without the said abstract of accounts for the year ending 31st December, 1899, having been made out and will he take steps to enforce compliance with this statute in respect of the abstract of accounts referred to being transmitted to the town clerk before the council confirm the rates proposed to be levied for the year commencing 31st March, 1900.

Section 21 of the Act of 1845 provides for the preparation of an annual account in abstract showing the total receipts and expenditure of all funds levied by virtue of that Act. The only rate created by the Act of 1845 was the police rate, and there was, in addition, at that time only one other rate levied in the borough—namely, the borough rate. Since 1845, however, the corporation has obtained over twenty Acts of Parliament, and concurrently with the great increase in the extent of the city and the number of its population, there has taken place a correspondingly large increase in the volume of the accounts to be dealt with, so that, however feasible it might formerly have been to comply with the statutory requirement in regard to the period within which the abstract of the accounts shall be prepared, it is not possible at the present day to comply literally with the provisions of the Act of 1845 in this respect. The town clerk submits, reasonably, so I think, that it would be absurd to deal with the accounts of the corporation in sections, and that the present system of publishing the abstracts of all the funds after the audit of the accounts is the natural and correct method and most adapted to the circumstances of the present time. Any ratepayer can sue the corporation for the penalty of £20 prescribed by the statute. It is not a matter calling for the intervention of the Executive.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if a candidate for the office of county surveyor, who has acted as locum tenens of that officer and who had passed the qualifying examination and had efficiently discharged his duties, is required to pass a fresh examination before his appointment to the office of county surveyor will be sanctioned.

:A second examination has been held to be required by the terms of the County Surveyors Act, 1862. It is, I think, an inconvenient and unreasonable condition to be applied universally, and the propriety of modifying or dispensing with it is now under consideration of the Government.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that though, as shown by the minutes of the Asylums Board of 11th February, 1897, the chapel in the Monaghan Lunatic Asylum was built for the use of all denominations, and even an order placed on the books that no religious emblems were to be placed on or in the building, the present committee of management have allowed various emblems to be introduced into the chapel and prohibited the Protestant chaplain entirely from holding service in the chancel; and whether he is aware that in consequence a new chapel costing over £2,000 is to be built and the rates burdened to that extent, while the Protestant inmates are in the meantime deprived of their usual religious ministrations.

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers the question, I beg to ask the following, of which I have given him private notice: Whether it was a fact that from the beginning it was well understood that the church was to be devoted to the accommodation of the Catholic patients only; was the church not built by the Board of Governors with the approval and sanction of the Board of Control to meet the requirements of Catholic worship; were the Catholic emblems, to which exception had now been taken for the first time, not visible dining the construction of the church; had not the Lord Bishop of Clogher and the Catholic members of the Asylum Committee made reasonable concessions to meet the interests of Protestant patients during the erection of the new Protestant church; and is the present movement anything more than an outburst of local bigotry to deprive the Catholic patients of the great spiritual advantage which the new church has conferred on them.

Order, order! The question cannot be allowed in that form.

The chapel in the Monaghan Lunatic Asylum was originally intended, I am informed, for the use of all denominations, but it was subsequently decided to reserve it exclusively for Roman Catholics and to build another place of worship for Protestants. Steps have been taken to proceed with the latter work, and in the meantime the arrangements for divine service for the Protestant inmates must necessarily be of a temporary nature. The medical superintendent of the asylum states that with the view of rendering the building appropriate for the Protestant service, the Roman Catholic altar is screened off during the celebration of the Protestant service, but that the Episcopalian chaplain complains that this screen is placed outside instead of inside the chancel rails. The responsibility in the matter is vested exclusively in the committee of management, and the Executive have no power to interfere. As to the supplementary question of the hon. Member for North Monaghan, he will see that I have answered the three first paragraphs; as to the fourth, I have no information; while I must respectfully decline to answer the fifth.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that an Orange party fired upon a Roman Catholic band near Coalisland on the night of the 1st March; whether the police, who were present on the occasion of the firing, took a loaded gun from one man and an iron poker from another; and whether steps will be taken to maintain the peace of the neighbourhood and to prevent a recurrence of such proceedings.

It appears that late on the night of the 1st inst. some shots were fired in the direction of a Nationalist drumming party near Coalisland. No person, I am happy to say, was injured. The police who accompanied the party at once went in pursuit of the persons by whom it was believed the shots were fired, but failed to capture them. One man, however, was found with a piece of iron about a foot in length in his possession, which was taken from him. A rifle, which was unloaded and which did not appear to have been used on the occasion, was subsequently found lying beside a ditch. The following morning a pistol was found on the road which had been traversed by the drumming party. The weapon had evidently been dropped by one of this party. With reference to the last paragraph, it is the paramount duty of the police to preserve the peace in this as in every other district. But there are occasions when it is very difficult to succeed in that object. In the present instance, a drumming party went out suddenly in the darkness of night for the ostensible purpose of making a counter demonstration to the celebration by loyalists in the locality of the relief of Ladysmith. It is obvious that the police, though they may do their utmost to preserve the peace, cannot altogether prevent a collision between the opposing parties.

Arising out of that answer, I would ask the right hon. Gen- tleman, is he aware that the Nationalist parade was held, in pursuance of a local custom, to celebrate annually the 1st of March?

I have no knowledge of that fact. If such a custom exist, it apparently only occurred to them for the first time on this occasion.

:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in how many prisons in Ireland are there open air exercise yards with shelter's in case of rain, and how do the ordinary prisons compare with convict prisons in Ireland. Is he aware that owing to the humidity of climate, prisoners are frequently given their two hours daily exercise in the rain, and often no exercise in consequence of no sheltered yard being provided; and whether any steps will be taken to remedy this state of things.

:Covered shelters are provided in the exercise yards attached to the prisons at Kilmainham, Maryborough, and Dundalk. In connection with all the large male prisons similar sheds are provided for prisoners employed at stone-breaking and other work. In the case of rain these sheds are availed of to a certain extent for shelter. There is no distinction between ordinary and convict prisons in this respect. There is no foundation for the statement in the second paragraph. In the opinion of the Prisons Board the present practice, which works satisfactorily, does not require alteration. There are, moreover, obvious objections to the erection of buildings in exercise yards where such would interfere with sunshine and the free circulation of air.

Am I to understand that prisoners are not occasionally exercised in the rain, and that on very wet days they get no exercise whatsoever?

I have answered that according to my belief there is no foundation for the statement.

I shall raise this question on the Estimates.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that within the past week a number of students of Trinity College, Dublin, were convicted of assaulting Constable M'Sharry, 89 B, and attempting to rescue a prisoner, and that penalties of £1 each were inflicted; whether he is aware that two labourers, convicted of assault on a constable and rescue of a prisoner on Monday last, were committed to prison for six months, and ordered to find bail for their future good behaviour; and whether he will ask the magistrates who tried these cases to explain the circumstances which influenced them in giving such different sentences for the same offence. In putting the question, may I supplement it with the words which were omitted at the Table—namely, did the assault consist of kicking the policeman and smashing his helmet?