said the effect of the Amendment which he proposed to move, if carried, would be that the Bill would be referred to an ordinary Select Committee of fifteen members, nominated by the House of Commons, on which both the promoters and the opponents to the Bill would be represented. Whereas the result of the motion made by the noble Lord would be that the Bill would go before a Committee supposed to be impartial but on which neither side would be able to rely. He was rather surprised at the course taken by the noble Lord having regard to the facts that after the Second Reading of the Bill the President of the Board of Trade said he would not have the Bill referred to the Private Bill Committee but to what might be called a Consultation Committee. He did not know what might be meant by that, but no consultation had taken place so far as he could see, and the great object of his Amendment would be the appointment of a Committee in which both those who were opposed and those who were favourable to the Bill would have entire confidence.

in seconding the Amendment expressed surprised at the inaction of the Board of Trade upon the subject. The hon. right Gentleman the President when the Bill was before the House had made a suggestion, which was the basis of what subsequently occurred, that there should be a Hybrid Committee. The one thing in favour of that was that it would be composed of experts, which was very necessary in such a matter as was now before the House. He hoped that what- ever might be done a Committee would be found which would give an impartial and export consideration to the subject, which was of most vital importance to both the municipalities and the public.

supported the motion, and could not conceive a better tribunal to send a Bill to than a Committee of the character suggested by the noble Lord. Such a Committee was not subject to the loose and slippery attendance which characterised the other Committees of the House.

hoped that the House would adopt the motion and reject the Amendment. The members of such a Committee were compelled to attend and hear evidence before they came to a decision, and if hon. Members did not attend they were reported to the House.

believed that this was a matter deeply affecting the welfare of the people, and that the House ought to appoint a strong Committee to deal with it. It appeared to him essential that the Committee should partake of a judicial character, and the proper way to deal with the matter was to send it to the Committee of Selection, who had always performed their duty with great success. He deprecated altogether the appointment of a Committee by the ordinary procedure, under which the members of a Select Committee were appointed. One advantage of such a Committee as was proposed was the certainty of attendance. In the Police and Sanitary Committee important issues might be decided by gentlemen who had not heard the evidence, but who picked up what information they could in a hurried manner before giving their votes. This was not merely a local, it was a national question, affecting the commerce, health and welfare of the people of the country; and the strongest possible Committee should be appointed to consider it. The only way of avoiding the difficulty of deciding questions by gentlemen who had not heard the evidence was to insist upon a full attendance of the members serving on the Committee. Perhaps attendance could not be made compulsory without notice, but at any rate the House could insist upon a full quorum of seven. He might mention that his own constituents were greatly interested in this matter, as they were proposing to spend £90,000 upon electric power undertakings.

thought the matter was of such great importance, that it was advisable the President of the Board of Trade should have an opportunity of expressing his views. He therefore moved the adjournment of the debate.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government of the United States has offered its good offices to Her Majesty's Government with a view to bringing about peace in South Africa.

The United States Chargé d'Affaires on the 13th inst. communicated to Lord Salisbury the following telegram which he had received from Mr. Hay:—

"By way of friendly good offices you will inform the British Minister for Foreign Affaire that I am to-day in receipt of a telegram from the United States Consul at Pretoria reporting that the Governments of the two African Republics request the President of the United States to intervene with a view to the cessation of hostilities; and that a similar request is made to representatives of European Powers. In communicating this request I am directed by the President of the United States to express his earnest hope that a way to bring about peace may be found, and to say that he would be glad to aid in any friendly manner to bring about so happy a result."

May I ask whether intervention was not allowed in the case of Venezuela?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether a cablegram, cabled on 14th February to the News, Cape Town, by the South African Conciliation Committee, to the effect that an influential conference was held on that day supporting a vigorous Liberal policy, and expressing appreciation of the efforts of the Cape Colony and Natal ministers for peace and the conference's sense of the difficulties to Colonists and of the strain especially inflicted on the Dutch by the war, with which they are out of sympathy, has been suppressed by the censors; and under what law or regulation the legally adopted resolutions of a legal meeting have been thus suppressed.

No information has reached this office that such a telegram was stopped by any of the censors.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is under consideration to award any medal or other distinction to the officers and men who defended Ladysmith, and especially in recognition of the gallantry shown in the repulse of the attack on 6th January.

The question of the grant of medals for services in South Africa must be considered as a whole.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary for War whether the 2nd Battalion Manchester Regiment and 1st Battalion Worcestershire Regiment are part of the 8th Division now about to be despatched to South Africa, and whether the linked battalions of these two regiments are already serving there; whether there are any exceptional reasons that have induced the military authorities to select these two battalions for active service under the conditions above named, when within the last few days it has been stated that the War Office consider it is undesirable to send a battalion to South Africa if it can be avoided when another battalion of the same regiment is already there; and what number of men it has been found necessary to draw from the Army and Militia Reserves to bring them up respectively to war strength.

The battalions in question proceed to South Africa as part of the 8th Division. They belong to four battalion regiments, in each of which two of the battalions will remain at home. They will require 456 and 498 men respectively from the Army Reserve, but none from the Militia Reserve.

May I ask when the 3rd and 4th Battalions were raised?

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman give notice of that question?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will lay upon the Table further Papers on the subject of the contingents of mounted troops furnished by the colonies of Australia and New Zealand; whether the latter colony was not behindhand in complying with the invitation of Her Majesty's Government to send a contingent of bushmen, but had in fact anticipated that invitation; and if there are any further particulars of these acts of loyalty which he would state to the House.

(1)Further Papers will be laid as soon as the correspondence as to the force now being raised is complete. (2) The New Zealand Government on the 3rd of February last offered, in addition to the four contingents furnished by the colony, to raise a further force of the bushmen class for general service in South Africa during the war. This offer was accepted, and the men, who will number 500, will serve on the same terms as the men now being raised by the Australian colonies. The total number offered and provided by New Zealand is 1,450. In proportion to population this would be equal to a force of 80,000 men from the United Kingdom. (3) Full information will be contained in the Papers.

On behalf of my hon. friend, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether certain of our loyal colonies in the West Indies offered to contribute contingents to our forces in the field in South Africa; and, if so, whether, with due regard to public policy, he can state the grounds upon which the offer was declined.

Such offers were made and gratefully acknowledged. Any refusal of a European contingent as, for example, from Trinidad, was mainly due to the number offered not being large enough to constitute a military unit.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the service rifle now in use by our troops weighs nearly 1 lb. more than the Mauser, the Mannlicher, and the weapon of the United States Army; whether the magazine of the British rifle can only be refilled by placing single cartridges one at a time in the slot, whereas the magazine of the Mauser rifle used by the Boers can be recharged by a single movement of the hand; whether the ammunition in use for the British rifle is heavier than that in use by the leading Continental armies, and whether, in consequence, a smaller supply is carried by the British soldier than by the German, French, or Italian soldier; and whether weight of equipment and rapidity of loading are points of grave military importance.

There are many patterns of Mannlichers and Mausers, and the British rifle is heavier than some and lighter than others. The American army rifle is ½ lb. heavier than the British rifle. The statements made in paragraph 2 are accurate, but there are reasons for preferring the arrangements for loading which have been adopted in the British rifle. The British cartridge weighs less than either the French, German, Austrian, or American, while the British soldier carries 150 rounds, the French carries 120, the German 160, and the Italian 96. The reply to the fourth paragraph is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what is the number of retired cavalry officers of the rank of captain available for service under Article 486c of the Royal Warrant of 1896; what number of such officers are at present employed in connection with the war; and if it is the intention of the War Office to recall any of these officers under Article 666 of Royal Warrant, 1896, during the present emergency.

The answer to the first question is 107; to the second, 36; and to the third, in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the statement that the Boers have wrecked the coal mines near Ladysmith, and that Government officials openly express their determination to demolish the whole of the machinery and plant of the leading gold mines, and to destroy the principal buildings in Johannesburg; and whether he will take into consideration the advisability of warning President Kruger that he will be held personally responsible for wanton damage to private property.

(1) I have observed such statements in the newspapers. (2) The matter is under consideration, but I wouldremind the hon. Member that on the outbreak of the war President Kruger was warned that he and his Government were expected to protect the lives and property of all peaceable persons, and will be held responsible for any acts committed contrary to the usages of civilised people (see pages 41 and 69 of C. 9530).

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a Reservist from Rochdale named Kierman, who joined his regiment (the Scottish Rifles) in South Africa and was afterwards transferred to the mounted infantry at Colenso, has died of wounds received at that place, and that his mother has had no official notification of this fact except through a letter just received from the captain of Kierman's company; and whether it is usual for the War Office to inform the nearest of kin in such cases.

The fact that Kierman had been wounded was duly notified to the regimental depôt for report to the next of kin, but by some accident, which is much regretted, the circumstance that he died later of his wound was overlooked. The usual practice is to notify casualties to the regimental district, whence they are communicated to the next of kin.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether any commissions have been given to men from the ranks in connection with the war in South Africa; and, if so, how many.

As I have already told the House, no recommendations for the promotion of men from the ranks to commissions for services in the field have yet been received from Lord Roberts.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he will give the actual or approximate number of those who have been returned wounded since the commencement of the war, who are already cured of their wounds and back again at the front.

I can give figures up to the 2nd February, which are as follows:—Wounded: officers, 261; non-commissioned officers and men, 4,583. Returned to duty: officers, 67; non-commissioned officers and men, 705. These figures do not include casualties in Ladysmith and Kimberley since investment.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give any further information respecting the three persons who were taken back into a proclaimed district after application had been made to the High Court at Cape Town, as to whom a writ of habeas corpus was subsequently issued by the High Court and made returnable on Monday last.

Sir A. Milner informed me on the 6th instant that he had received a report from the military authorities to the effect that the general officer commanding Orange River had been carefully into the case of the three men and had ordered their release, there not being evidence to convict.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what is the legal age at which the military authorities can retain a recruit who, having enlisted, has claimed his discharge either by himself or his legal guardians on the grounds that he is under age; whether a boy named James Martin enlisted in the 1st Battalion of the Dublin Fusiliers last October, and whether his parents claimed his discharge on the grounds that he was under age, and enclosed the official certificate of his birth, showing his exact age was seventeen years and six months; and whether it is intended to discharge James Martin; and, if not, on what grounds is he retained.

There is no legal age. The practice is to let a recruit go who is under seventeen years of age if his discharge is claimed. If he is over seventeen the discretion rests entirely with the general officer commanding the district. In this case he has decided to retain James Martin, and the man will accordingly be held to serve.

Do I understand the hon. Gentleman to say that Martin will be discharged?

I said just the reverse.

Suppose Martin is a ward in Chancery?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War why no Report for the Army Medical Department has been issued since the Report for the year 1897; what has been the cause of the delay; and when the next Report will be given in succession to Vol. xxxix.

The Report for 1898 will shortly be issued.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether some of the most modern guns have been removed from their places in the coast defences and sent to South Africa: and if so, what steps have been taken to replace them with others equally or possibly more efficient.

No modern guns have been removed from their places in defences and sent to South Africa.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the business of J. Bennett and Sons, which has been recently struck off the list of contractors to the War Office on the ground of supplying defective stores for the use of Her Majesty's Field Force in South Africa, was some time ago purchased by Underwood and Sons, Limited, who have since carried on the business under the name and style of J. Bennett and Sons; whether the said Underwood and Sons, Limited, had before purchasing the business of Bennett and Sons been struck off the list of War Office contractors for malpractices in the execution of contracts; and whether he is aware that the said Underwood and Sons, Limited, although struck off the War Office list of contractors, have subsequently, under the name and style of Bennett and Sons, executed large contracts for the War Office, including that which has led to their being again struck off the War Office list as J. Bennett and Sons; whether he can state whether any and what person is responsible for ascertaining the identity of contractors executing contracts for the War Office; and whether he can state whether any and what precautions are taken to prevent contractors guilty of malpractices continuing to contract with the War Office after being struck off the list under circumstances similar to the above.

I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War whether Messrs. Underwood and Sons, who were struck of the list of contractors for supplying rotten hay to the forces, were the same firm which bought the name and business of Bennett, and again tendered and were again dismissed from the list of contractors for a similar offence shortly afterwards; and whether the Government proposes to prosecute this firm.

Bennett's, until they were recently struck off the list, had been regular contractors to the War Office since 1873. Underwood's was struck off the list in 1884. It would now appear from statements made by Brown—the other contractor recently removed from the list—that Underwood acquired Bennett's business, and has been dealing with the Department in the name of Bennett. The Financial Secretary, through his executive officers, is responsible for making all necessary inquiries as to the standing of contractors. The names of blacklisted contractors are widely circulated among all officers likely to be concerned; and every effort is made to detect any attempt on the part of such contractors to deal with the war Department under assumed names.

Does my hon. friend see any objection now to give the Returns in the form I asked for?—that is, to give the Christian names, the surnames, and addresses of all the members of every firm which were struck off the list.

Does my right hon. friend mean the names of all contractors that have ever been struck off the list?

In my motion for the Return I said, "During the current financial year," but I should like it for ten years.

Perhaps my right hon. friend will confer with me in the matter. There is not the least disposition to screen or shelter anyone. The hesitation of the Secretary of State to disclose, at first, the two names of these contractors, whose names appear in the Returns given to the House, was solely due to the fact that litigation was pending between them which might have been prejudiced by his so doing.

In reply to the latter part of my question, will the hon. Gentleman say whether the Government will prosecute?

Upon that point I have to say that the Secretary of State is taking legal advice.

Is it the case that the War Office only recently took back a contractor who had been previously struck off?

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

Then I give notice that I shall call attention to the matter on the Estimates.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he will sanction a Return showing the comparative outlay in England, Scotland, and Ireland respectively on foot of Government stores and supplies purchased since the beginning of the current financial year, April 1st, 1899, to the present time.

The preparation of such a Return would involve an immense amount of labour. I am not prepared to impose such a task upon the War Office at the present time.

May I ask the First Lord if it would not be possible to give such a Return, considering the great importance of this matter in its bearing upon the controversy arising out of the Report of the Financial Relations Commission? It is of the utmost importance, in view of the debate that is coming on next week.

I am quite ready to make inquiry into the matter, but I understand that every Irish contractor has as great facility for obtaining contracts as English and Scotch contractors. Consequently, I do not see that the Return would have the bearing of which the hon. Gentleman speaks upon the debate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman facilitate the obtaining by us of information as to the comparative, outlay upon alleged Imperial purposes in England, Scotland, and Ireland?

If that is the inquiry the hon. Gentleman desires, I shall be glad to try to give it, but I am afraid it will be very difficult to obtain the information.

Will the right hon. Gentleman facilitate the obtaining of the Returns as soon as possible?

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the cadets at the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, who are being trained for the engineers and artillery, are taught gun drill with muzzle-loading guns of an obsolete pattern; and whether the Government will provide guns of a modern type for the instruction of the cadets at Woolwich.

They have breech-loading guns for drill purposes of the latest type.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the Government requirements for rifle ranges entail the provision of a piece of land 4,000 yards long by 500 yards wide; and, whether it is possible, by means of screens, to provide a perfectly safe range for the use of the Lee-Enfield rifle on a much smaller piece of land.

The dimensions of a range depend entirely on the nature of the country, but on a level site for a 1,000 yards range ground would be required in length 2,000 yards behind the butt, and in breadth 200 yards at the butt, and 500 yards at 1,000 yards in rear. Inquiries are at present being made in regard to the provision of safety ranges of smaller dimensions.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the desirability of giving to the Yeomanry the long-service medal now given to the Volunteers has been considered; and, if so, what decision has been arrived at.

This suggestion has been repeatedly made, but it has not been thought desirable to adopt it.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether any allowance for outfit will be provided out of the public funds for Volunteer officers proceeding with active service companies to South Africa, such outfit forming no part of their ordinary equipment and being of no further use to them after their return home on the conclusion of the war.

A capitation allowance of £12 is paid to the corps for the provision of the outfit of each officer and man of the Volunteers proceeding with the service companies to South Africa.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether it is intended to graduate the Volunteer capitation grant according to the area covered by the corps, inasmuch as a country corps may require as many as a dozen armouries and drill halls, whereas a city corps need only require one.

I am afraid that the suggestion of my honourable and gallant friend would not prove practicable.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if assistance will be given to companies other than headquarter companies to raise funds for the erection of drill halls. May I also ask when the new Volunteer regulations will be out?

I cannot answer the latter question without notice, but they will not be long, certainly. The same assistance in the nature of facilities for the grant of loans is given to detached companies as is given to headquarter companies.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the War Office has received a memorial from Shetland asking for permission to establish a local Volunteer force, either of rifles or artillery; and whether the Government will be prepared to entertain favourably this request, considering that there is no Militia force raised in the county, and (except the Royal Naval Reserve, which is confined to fishermen) there is no opportunity offered for the people of the islands to qualify themselves to take a part in the defence of the country.

The memorial has been recently received, and will be duly considered. It will be difficult, however, to utilise their services in schemes for national defence.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether in allotting the War Loan he will give preference to applications made by British subjects.

I am afraid it would not be possible to adopt the suggestion of my hon. friend. No such preference was suggested in the terms of the issue, and I do not think it would be possible in practice.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why, on Tuesday afternoon, only 200 copies of "Africa, No. 2, 1900," laid before Parliament on that day, were sent from the Foreign Office for the use of Members; and if he is aware that, after repeated inquiries for the said Papers at the Vote Office by Members, no further copies could be obtained.

The 200 copies of Parliamentary Paper "Africa No. 2 (1900)" which were sent to the Vote Office from the Foreign Office on Tuesday afternoon were sent in pursuance of a long-established practice, under which, in special cases, a limited number of advance copies of a Paper of exceptional interest is furnished at the earliest moment for the immediate use of such hon. Members as may wish to refer to it. The usual delivery of the Paper "Africa No. 2" took place on Wednesday morning, independently of the special advance delivery made on Tuesday afternoon.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the attention of Her Majesty's Government has been called to the fact that the British community in Dresden have been subjected to continual insults during the past three months; that the British flag was torn down from the Anglo-American Club in which it was displayed; and that the English church has been damaged and disfigured; and whether Her Majesty's Government have any information to this effect; and, if so, whether they propose to address a remonstrance to the Government of Saxony, with a view to prevent a recurrence of such proceedings.

Her Majesty's Government are informed by Sir A. Condie Stephen that there have been occasional instances of insolent behaviour to British subjects in the streets of Dresden. The British flag which was left flying from a window of the Anglo-American Club at night was torn down, and the English Church was on two occasions disfigured at night. Sir A. Condie Stephen has not failed to make strong representations to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who has expressed deep regret and has given satisfactory assurances that every possible measure will be taken by the police to prevent recurrence of such deplorable incidents and to protect British subjects. The individual suspected of tearing down the flag has been arrested. The flag has been recovered.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the following notice was issued on the 22nd of February to the engine-room artificers serving with the Channel Squadron—namely, "Unless the E.R.A.'s who rode into Castleton, passing the rear-admiral and the captains of the "Hannibal" and "Resolution," are reported, the leave of the E.R.A.'s ashore to-day will be stopped until further orders"; and whether this notice has since been withdrawn; and, if not, whether he will take steps to have it withdrawn in the interests of those chief petty officers who were in no way concerned with the offence.

The Admiralty have no knowledge of the notice to the engine-room artificers of the Channel Squadron referred to in the question. In any case, the Admiral in command is responsible for the maintenance of discipline and order in the fleet under his orders, and it would be very undesirable for the Admiralty to interfere with the steps he has found it necessary to take to secure these.

Will the hon. Gentleman cause inquiries to be made as to whether this notice was posted?

I will consult my right hon. friend.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that there is discontent among the crews of the Channel Fleet with respect to the quality and quantity of the food supplied to the ships, and that complaints with reference to the quality and quantity of the food are discountenanced by the officers, and regarded as evidence of insubordination; and whether he will direct an investigation independently conducted to be made as to whether the rations served on board Her Majesty's ships of the Channel Fleet are of the proper quality and quantity, and whether the Admiralty will direct the sale of provisions on board these ships to be discontinued, or provide that goods be sold at the canteens not at extortionate prices but at the prices at which similar goods are sold on shore.

The reply to the first question is in the negative. With regard to the second question, I must refer the hon. Gentleman to the remarks made by the First Lord of the Admiralty in the course of the debate in this House on Thursday last.^* The managing committee, which with two exceptions is composed of representatives of the men, should be competent to take precautions against extortionate prices being charged. As a matter of fact, it is understood that the goods sold in the canteens are retailed at a lower price than that at which they could be obtained by the men on shore.

Could not arrangements be made to supply the men in the Channel Fleet with home-fed meat?

All the fresh meat supplied to the Channel Squadron is supplied at local ports by local merchants.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has any information to the effect that the Telegraphic Convention with Russia has been renewed by the Indo-European Company on the basis of a return of 17½ per cent. to that Government from the gross earnings of the company; and whether this arrangement has been concluded with the knowledge of and after consultation with the Indian Government, as one of the joint purse partners.

^*See page 413 of this volume.

I have no information as to the renewal of the agreement between the Indo-European Telegraph Company and the Russian Government, nor has the Government of India, so far as I am aware, been consulted on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will lay upon the Table the memorial of Kanty Chandra Mookerjee, addressed to him under date of 22nd December, 1874, together with the Papers therein referred to.

I have received no memorial from the person named in the hon. Member's question bearing the date mentioned in the Paper. A memorial dated the 22nd December, 1897, has, however, been received, in which the memorialist appealed against orders passed in 1889, dismissing him from Government service and refusing him a pension. I saw no reason to interfere. The Papers do not appear to be of sufficient importance to be presented to Parliament.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will specify the various forms of employment provided at the famine relief works; and, whether he can state approximately the number of persons employed on breaking metal for roads, on excavating tanks, and on constructing embankments for railways.

The hon. Member has mentioned, in the latter part of his question, the principal forms of employment provided for those who need relief in the famine districts; namely, the construction of roads, of irrigation works, and of railways. Under each of these heads many different kinds of labour are comprised, and the object of the authorities is, as far as possible, to adapt the work to the habits and capacities of the workers; but I cannot give a complete statement either as to the nature of these various employments, or as to the number of persons employed upon each of them.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the prohibition of the investment of trust funds in Colonial Government securities is still in operation; and, if so, whether there is any early prospect of the removal of this restriction.

It is not correct to say that there is a prohibition of the investment of trust funds in colonial securities, but they can only be so invested if the terms of the trust deed permit it. The matter is under consideration, and I hope later to be in a position to make a statement on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the attention of the Governor of Gibraltar has been called to the question of introducing reforms into the administration of the police, municipal, and sanitary departments at Gibraltar; and what steps Her Majesty's Government propose to take for the purpose of remedying the grievances of which residents in the town and fortress complain.

The only reform required in regard to the police in Gibraltar is the building of police barracks. The question is engaging the attention of the Governor, but a suitable site is difficult to obtain. The Sanitary Commissioners who are the only municipal authority in the town perform their duties satisfactorily. I am not aware of any grievances of which the residents complain.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state the decision of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the advisability of holding a departmental or inter-departmental inquiry into the sanitary condition of the barracks, hospitals, and burial grounds at Malta, with the object of improving the buildings occupied by the Army and by Naval officers and others in that island.

The consideration of this subject has not yet been concluded, but as at present advised Her Majesty's Government do not perceive that any departmental inquiry will be required.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received any information as to the reported fighting in Nigeria between 500 men of the second battalion of the West African Frontier Force and a body of Mitchi tribesmen, cast of Lokoja; and whether he can state what were the casualties of the British troops, and what was the object of the expedition.

Yes; General Lugard has reported that in January the Mitchis made an attack on a party engaged in constructing a telegraph line from Lokoja to Ibbi, killing one native soldier and wounding Captain Eaton and ten native soldiers. Shortly afterwards a further attack was made, in which two native soldiers were killed and three dangerously wounded. Lieutenant-Colonel Lowry-Cole has been sent with reinforcements to restore order, but no further information has at present been received except that Sergeant Hawkins has been wounded.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the Report compiled by the two Royal Commissioners, Sir James Erskine and Sir John Bramston, dealing with the French treaty shore question in Newfoundland, will be printed and issued to Members.

I have already stated in reply to similar questions^* that it is not intended to publish the Report at present.

Will there be any means by which Members of this House can obtain cognisance of this Report, or is it to remain hidden?

Order, order!

^* See The Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. Lxxvii., page 443.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, pending the general decision promised as to the memorial presented to the Postmaster General by various employées of the Manchester Post Office with reference to the stripes of men who were juniors and have claimed full service and corresponding stripes still undistributed, he will consent to issue the stripes claimed in accordance with the Tweedmouth Committee Report (i.e., junior service counted as half time), in the following cases: A. Hill, who has ten years and three months full appointment, and three years and four months junior, including unestablished, or two years and ten months appointed junior service, possessing now only one stripe, which he received in January, 1892, his appointed junior service having been counted as full time; and in the case of A. Gerard, who has fifteen years and three months full appointment, and three years and three months junior, including four months unestablished, possessing now two stripes, the last of which he received eight years ago, his junior service being then counted as full time.

The Tweedmouth Committee decided that service as junior postman can only be reckoned as half time towards good conduct stripes, and it has been decided by the Postmaster General that the case of the postmen at Manchester shall be dealt with accordingly.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether the Brothers Gorton, of Newton-le-Willows, after having refused a large monetary offer from the American Government for the results of their discoveries in respect to the successful crossing of cereals and grasses, have offered the whole of their experiments gratuitously to three successive Ministers of Agriculture for the benefit of the British farmer; and whether the reply of each Minister in question has been that there is no provision at the Board of Agriculture for the supervision of such experiments.

Correspondence has taken place between Messrs. R. and J. Garton, of Newton-le-Willows, and successive Presidents of the Board of Agriculture, with regard to the work they have done in connection with the production of improved varieties of wheat, barley, oats, and rye, but the purport neither of the letters received nor of the answers sent appears to me to be correctly indicated in the question. I shall be happy to supply a copy of the correspondence to the hon. Member if he so desires.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is in a position to state what measures the Government will take to put down the serious evil of sheep worrying.

We propose to include, in the Bill which I am about to introduce, certain provisions with regard to the seizure of stray dogs and the prevention of straying, which will, I hope, enable local authorities to check the worrying of sheep, with regard to which, as I am well aware, considerable complaint has arisen in many parts of Scotland. The proposals we make with regard to the issue of certificates of exemption from license duty will also, I trust, be of some value in this connection.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the following cases have been reported to the Home Office as cases of lead poisoning:—John James Brooks, glost placer, at Johnston's, Hanley; Edward Gibson, dipper, at Johnson's, Burslem; Thomas Walker, ground layer, at Grimwade's; Ellen Harrup, litho duster, at Booth's; Harriett Hall, litho transfer duster, at Chromo Transfer Company's; and, if not, why they were not so reported.

The case of Gibson has been duly notified as one of lead poisoning. The cases of Brooks, Harrup, and Hall have not been notified, and they are not believed by their medical attendants to be cases of lead poisoning, and I may say that two of these persons (being women) were, on examination by the certifying surgeon, suspended from employment in August last. The reasons for suspension may be various; but if the surgeon had believed them to be lead poisoning, it would have been his duty also to report them. The remaining case of Walker is one of paralysis of the wrist developed three years ago, when the man consulted the late Dr. Arlidge. I cannot say why Dr. Arlidge did not notify the case. I am informed that the man has not since that date consulted a medical man.

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. Bullard 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.

Yes, Sir, I have made inquiries, but as proceedings are being taken against two of the ringleaders, and as I am informed that Mr. Bullard is about to make a claim under the Riot (Damages) Act, 1886, it would not be proper for me to say more at present except that I hope the local authorities, on whom the responsibility lies, will everywhere exercise firmness in preventing such riotous proceedings.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be good enough to say a word in answer to the concluding part of my question, with regard to the steps to be taken to prevent a recurrence of these disorders.

I thought my answer implied that I thought the Government could not do anything more at present. Proceedings are, as I explained, being taken against two of the ringleaders, and a claim for damages will be made. Under these circumstances it would be highly improper for me to say anything as to the circumstances attending these proceedings.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under similar circumstances in Ireland trial by jury would have been suspended under the Coercion Act?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a meeting near Highbury Corner, which was being conducted in a perfectly quiet manner, last Sunday, until broken up by the police on the ground that it was likely to become disorderly; whether this is a sufficient pretext for interfering with a peacefully conducted meeting; and whether he can promise that such gatherings shall be protected in future.

I have made enquiry into this matter. The police did not interfere until the meeting had in their judgment become disorderly and there was serious danger of a breach of the peace. I am of opinion that the police were entirely justified in the action they took.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General whether his attention has been called to the damage to property in Scarborough during recent riots, belonging to Mr. Wood head, a late Member of this House, and other persons; and whether he can say from what source, if any, compensation can be claimed by those persons out of public funds.

I have not seen any particulars of the incident to which the hon. Member refers, and it is, therefore, not possible for me to express any opinion as to whether any proceedings for compensation would be successful.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the numerous recent instances of disturbance connected with meetings called for the discussion of South African affairs, or directed against the person and property of individuals owing to their supposed opinions about the present war, Her Majesty's Government will cause inquiry to be made how far and by whom these disturbances were organised; and will he consider what steps are necessary to prevent a repetition of such occurrences, and to punish the offenders.

Every case reported to my right hon. friend the Home Secretary has been carefully examined, and every such unhappy occurrence will be so examined. There is not the slightest evidence that there has been any organisation of these demonstrations, which appear to be absolutely spontaneous in their character as far as the evidence which has come before my right hon. friend goes to show. As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, it is the local authorities who are responsible both for the maintenance of order and for the punishment of transgressors, and any aid which can be given to them in carrying out those duties shall, of course, be readily afforded. Speaking for myself, I strongly deprecate these demonstrations, and I expect no good of them. I think that they are contrary to the best traditions of English life. For a large part of my political life I have belonged to a party which was unable to hold meetings in certain portions of the country, and, therefore, I am at least as anxious on this subject as the right hon. Gentleman, who has been more fortunately situated than I myself could possibly be. But I think that the responsibility rests not only upon the local authorities and upon those concerned in these unfortunate proceedings, but also upon those who called the meetings. It must be remembered that public feeling is necessarily deeply stirred at the present time. In every district of the country there are persons who have lost near relatives or friends in the present war; and nine-tenths of the country—ninety-nine hundredths of the country—believe, rightly or wrongly, that these meetings are called for an object which, if it were effectual, would render the occurrence of these great calamities possible. They think that in no other country in the world, and least of all in the Transvaal itself, would such meetings be tolerated; and they are aware that the fact of such meetings being held is, by people who know little of our methods and traditions, used abroad as an indication of a divided country and a hesitating Government. In these circumstances, the tension of public opinion must necessarily be of a kind affording a grave anxiety to those responsible for the public peace; and I venture to add that those who call these meetings ought to be careful lest they ask more of human nature than all history shows that human nature is capable of giving.

I have only two questions to ask the right hon. Gentleman in reference to the somewhat long explanation which he has made. The first is this. I wish to know whether he is aware of what I believe to be the case, as far as I have been able to look into the matter, that a large number of the meetings which were the occasion of these disturbances were private meetings, and not public meetings at all. In the second place, I wish, for the sake of curiosity, passing by the general political effect of what he has said, to ask the right hon. Gentleman on what occasions and where the party to which he belongs has been prevented from obtaining a hearing—[Cries of "Aston Riots!" and "Birmingham!"]

As to the in formation which the right hon. Gentle man desires, in regard to the nature to the meetings, I am afraid that I must ask him to put the question to my right hon. friend the Home Secretary, who has the details, or to give me notice of the question, when I shall be glad to answer it at a future day. As to the second supplementary question of the right hon. Gentleman, I listened to it with some surprise; for I remember that during the crisis of the Home Rule discussion it was impossible, even in most parts of the metropolis, for the Unionist party to hold a meeting.

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman this simple supplementary question. He spoke of having consulted with the Home Secretary. Will he take care that inquiry shall be pursued further, and shall apply to the incidents which have occurred in Scotland?

I will consult my right hon. friend the Lord Advocate on the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General whether he is aware that under Section 3 and relative schedule of 24 George II., c. 23,^* Easter Day is the first Sunday after the full moon which happens upon or next after the 21st day of March, and if the full moon happens upon a Sunday, Easter Day is the Sunday after; and that the first full moon which happens next after the 21st day of March this year is on Sunday the 15th April at 1.2 a.m., and that Easter Day should therefore apparently fall on the 22nd April, and not on the 15th April as given in the calendar; and whether having regard to the possibility of doubt arising as to when bills falling due on a day dependent on the date of Easter are legally payable, he will introduce a short Bill to make the 15th April Easter Day this year in Law as well as in the calendar.

The third section of the statute referred to by the hon. Member enacts that Easter shall be observed according to these tables and rules annexed to the statute. One of the tables provides that the paschal full moon in the year 1900 falls on April 14, and that the feast of Easter falls on the 15th. The fact is that the full moon referred to in the statute is not the actual full moon nor the mean full moon, but a fictitious or statutory full moon, sometimes called the ecclesiastical full moon. As there is no possibility of doubt upon the question it is not proposed to introduce any legislation respecting it. It may interest the House to know that attention was called to a similar occurrence in the years 1818 and 1845, and some learned papers were written upon the subject, to which I shall be glad to refer the hon. Member. Perhaps I may be allowed to point out that some arrangement of the kind was necessary, as otherwise Easter might fall on different days

^*Reference may be made to The Parliamentary History, Vol. xiv., p. 979, for an account of "Proceedings in the Lords on the Bill for regulating the Commencement of the Year, and for Correcting the Calendar now in use" (1751). The speech of the Earl of Chesterfield in introducing this measure is, unfortunately, not preserved, but an account of it will be found in No. 215 of the Chesterfield "Letters." The speech of the Earl of Macclesfield (reproduced in the History), in seconding the motion for Second Reading, abounds in astronomical lore and historical detail, and gives a complete account of the methods adopted for the finding of the date of Easter, commencing—naturally—with the rule laid down by the Council of Nice in 325.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that dissatisfaction exists in those parts of Scotland which were excluded from a share of the Secondary Education grant under the Minute of 27th April last; whether he will specify the districts thus excluded and state whether the Act of 1898, which applies to the whole of Scotland, justifies such exclusion; whether he is aware that in Banffshire excellent secondary education is provided in the secondary departments of State-aided schools, and that there is no immediate prospect of higher class secondary or technical schools, which are alone entitled to the grant, being established in the county; whether the Secretary for Scotland has considered a letter of 1st December last from the County Committee on Secondary Education, pointing out that the effect of the Minute will be to draw away the best pupils to a distance and cause deterioration of the elementary schools, with a tendency to rural depopulation; and whether he will reconsider the Minute with reference to the facts and arguments set forth in that letter.

The conditions under which the grant in question is distributed apply equally to all parts of Scotland, and no district is at any disadvantage except in so far as it fails to fulfil these conditions. The arguments which are outlined in the terms of the hon. Member's question were set forth in detail by the Banffshire County Committee, and were fully considered by the Secretary for Scotland and dealt with by him in correspondence. The letter of 1st December has also been considered, but it does not add anything to the case, as previously stated. There is no intention of altering the policy laid down by the Minute of 27th April.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, although the scales of pay at the Limerick and Cork Post Offices were the same until 1898, Cork men are now on a higher pay scale than Limerick; and what are the grounds which justify this difference, against which the Limerick postmen have unsuccessfully petitioned the Department.

As stated in reply to a similar question asked by the hon. Member on the 1st August last, the general higher rate of wages at Cork and the greater size and importance of the town as compared with Limerick are considered to justify the payment of the Cork postmen on a higher scale.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether there are any of the Maamtrasna prisoners still in custody; if so, how many; where are they confined; what is the condition of their health; and whether it is intended to reconsider their sentences.

Three of the prisoners referred to in this question, who were sentenced to death and had their sentences commuted, are still in custody. Two of them, namely Martin and Thomas Joyce, are confined in Mary borough Prison, and the third, Patrick Joyce, is in Mount joy Prison. The Medical Member of the Prisons Board reports that Martin Joyce is in possession of good health and strength, that Thomas Joyce is in good health, and that the health of Patrick Joyce is fairly good. The cases of these convicts were under the consideration of the Lord Lieutenant so recently as October last, and will again come up for consideration in the ordinary way at the usual intervals, or sooner on memorial, if special circumstances require.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that the master of Ballivor National School, Mr. Fox, has been convicted before County Court Judge Curran and fined £40 for assaulting a boy pupil, and that this is the second convic- tion against this teacher for assaulting a pupil; and whether he is still in charge of Ballivor School, or engaged in any capacity on it, and whether the Commissioners of National Education intend to take any and what action in the matter.

The case of the teacher referred to has been before the Commissioners, who have directed that the payment of his salary shall cease as from the end of the present month.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that in the case of the dispensary doctor of Ballivor full fees were paid by the litigant in whose interest he attended court, and the union was charged with the payment of his substitute; and, if so, what action he proposes to take to relieve the rates of Trim Union of such payments.

I have no information as to whether the doctor was paid his fees or not. I have already, in reply to a question of the hon. Member, informed him that the Local Government Board have been advised that a doctor who is compelled under subpœna to attend a court of justice is temporarily incapacitated from performing his duties within the meaning of the Relief Act, and that the Board of Guardians were bound, therefore, to make provision for the care of the sick poor during his absence by employing and paying a temporary substitute. I also stated that the doctor, if obliged to pay his substitute out of the expenses he receives as a witness, must be out of pocket by reason of his obedience to the subpœna. My answer on this latter point is not correctly reported in the Parliamentary Debates of the 1st instant.

On behalf of my hon. friend, I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that notice was served on upwards of fifty applicants for the fixing of fair rents of their holdings situate in the districts of Glencolombkiln and Kilcar that their applica- tions would be heard by a sub-commission sitting at Killybegs, a distance of upwards of thirty miles from some of their holdings; whether he is aware that the hearing of these cases has been adjourned till after Easter; and whether steps will be taken to secure the hearing of these cases in Carrick, which can be reached by the tenants with less inconvenience, and is nearer their holdings.

With regard to the first paragraph, I would refer to my reply to the similar question addressed to me by the hon. Member on the 2nd instant. At the sitting of the Sub-Commissioners at Killybegs on the 1st instant application was made for the adjournment of a number of cases, and in granting the adjournment it was arranged that the cases should be heard at Carrick on a date to be fixed hereafter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of assistant surveyors employed by the Board of Public Works in Ireland; whether their duties comprise the preparation of plans and specifications for new buildings and improvements, the inspection of national schools and parochial houses, post offices, and police barracks, and frequently situated in three and four counties; and what are the salaries of these officials.

The number of assistant surveyors is eleven—namely, five first class and six second class. The statement in the second paragraph is substantially accurate, but the assistant surveyors do not prepare the plans and specifications for important new buildings and improvements, such as new post offices. This is done by the three principal surveyors, who also check and, if necessary, revise the plans and specifications prepared by the assistant surveyors for minor new works and maintenance. The salaries of the assistant surveyors are:—First class, £310–15–400 per annum; second class, £200–10–300 per annum.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state in what counties of Ireland have the salaries of county surveyors been increased by the Local Government Board beyond the amounts decided upon as sufficient by the county councils; and upon what grounds have the views of the local bodies conversant with the duties to be performed by these officials been ignored and set aside in some cases.

In fourteen counties the surveyors have appealed to the Local Government Board against the salaries proposed to be given to them by the councils, and in these cases the Board have increased the salaries. The counties are Carlow, Galway West Riding, Queen's, Tipperary South Riding, Waterford, Westmeath, Antrim, Cork West Riding, Kerry, Kilkenny, Leitrim, Mayo North and South Riding, and Wexford. In the eight last-mentioned counties the councils proposed to allow the surveyors no increase of salary, notwithstanding their admittedly increased duties, thus entirely ignoring the provisions of Section 115 (18) of the Act. In several Counties the salary of the surveyor is still under consideration, As regards the second paragraph, I must refer to my reply to the question of the hon. Member for West Kerry on the 9th inst.^*

Can the right hon. Gentleman point out what are the increased duties which necessitate the increase in salaries?

I cannot state them in detail at the moment.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware—

Order, order! The hon. Gentleman cannot argue the matter.

I beg to ask the Vice President of the Department of Agriculture for Ireland whether he has seen the scheme for the administration and management of the Ulster Agricultural and Dairy School and Henry Trust, as approved by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland on 22nd June, 1899.

^* See page 492 of this volume.

The answers to the first three paragraphs in the question are in the affirmative. I cannot give the specific undertaking asked for in the fourth paragraph, but when the Agricultural and Technical Instruction Act comes into operation the Department will, in conference with the trustees, consider the advisability of supplementing the funds of the Henry trust, and carrying out the instructions of the founder. Under the scheme approved last year by the Lord Chancellor for Ireland, preference has to be given to a particular parish in the selection of pupils for agricultural instruction. This provision could hardly apply to public funds. The Attorney General has consented to bring the scheme again before the Lord Chancellor with a view to see whether it can be modified so as to meet this objection.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, as representing the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that street preachers are at present creating disturbances in Cork; and whether steps will be taken to put a stop to this practice.

I am informed that on Sunday last an attack was made by a large crowd on the preachers who were conducting open-air services in the streets of Cork. Owing, however, to the prompt intervention of the police, no serious injury, I am happy to say, was sustained by any of the party, although two of them were unfortunately knocked down in the struggle that took place. With regard to the second paragraph, the hon. Member must be aware that the legality of street preaching has frequently been discussed in this House. The practice, unless it amounts to an obstruction of the public streets, is no offence by common or statute law, and the police have no power to put a stop to it, as suggested.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are plenty of places of worship for all creeds in Cork?

Order, order!

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, as representing the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can say on what grounds the press were excluded from the recent investigation relative to the Ban try murder case; and whether instructions will be given that representatives of the press shall be admitted to any further proceedings.

The Justices in the exercise of their powers expressly conferred upon them by the 9th Section of the Petty Sessions Act excluded the press because they considered, rightly in my opinion, that it was more conducive to the administration of justice at the present stage of the case so to do than to admit the press. The reply to the second paragraph is in the negative. There is no power to give such instructions.

May I ask whether such matters are always left to the discretion of the local magistrates?

Yes, it is entirely within the discretion of the bench whether they shall exclude the press.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, hitherto, in cases of this kind—?

Order, order! Notice should be given.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, as Chairman of the Irish Prisons Board, in how many gaols in Ireland are prisoners allowed one book per month for secular reading; whether the single volume is only given to prisoners who are confined for terms over two months, and then only permitted at end of first month; whether such books can only be obtained from the prison library; and if the number of such books available for prisoners is regulated by any standard or fixed principle, or if it is meagre in county prisons as a rule.

My right hon. friend the Chief Secretary is not Chairman of the Irish Prisons Board, as stated by the hon. Member. In all local and minor prisons in Ireland every industrious and well-conducted prisoner who can read receives one secular book at a time. The book is not given for a month, but is changed at the discretion of the Governor. As regards the second paragraph, every prisoner receives a secular book on admission into prison. In the case of ordinary prisoners the books can only be obtained from the prison library, but first-class misdemeanants and prisoners awaiting trial are permitted, at their own expense and subject to the approval of the Visiting Committee, to obtain books in addition to those supplied by the prison. The supply of books in Irish local prisons is not a meagre one. A grant is annually made for the purchase of books, and the supply is constantly increasing.

Am I to understand that prisoners are allowed a secular book to read during the first month, and that if a prisoner finishes the book in the course of the second month he will be allowed another?

The book is changedas I have stated, at the discretion of the Governor.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, as representing the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if it is competent for medical officers of health and sanitary officers under the poor law guardians who are in receipt of emoluments from the ratepayers to hold in the same district the honorary and responsible position of aldermen and county councillors, under whose control arises matters affecting other officers of the poor law guardians.

As a general rule a man cannot be the paid officer or servant of or contractor to a county or district council, or municipal body, of which he is himself a member. If the hon. Gentleman desires a more definite opinion I must ask him to refer to a concrete case.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether influential representations have been made from Belfast to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, as to the satisfaction with which the inhabitants of that city would receive a visit from Her Majesty during the Queen's stay in Ireland; and whether the matter will be dutifully laid before Her Majesty, with a view to ascertain the Queen's pleasure concerning the desired visit to the capital of Ulster.

Her Majesty's Ministers are offering no advice to Her Majesty in regard to her movements during her approaching visit to Ireland, which, as my hon. friend knows, is of a private character.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state on what date, and at what hour, it is proposed to take the Report on Army Estimates, Vote 1, which has not been discussed.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman proposes to-night to make further progress with Vote 2 of the Army Estimates?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, that cannot be taken after twelve. If my memory serves me, Report of Supply stands before the Vote to which he refers, but I hope the Report may be reached in reasonable time.