I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Premiers of Victoria and New South Wales have, in reply to telegrams from Sir Alfred Milner, refused to allow recruiting for the South African Constabulary to be carried on in those colonies; and whether Sir Alfred Milner had authority from the Home Government for appealing to Australian Governments to allow such recruiting.

At the same time may I ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Sir Alfred Milner cabled to the Governor General that he proposed to send an officer to recruit men in Australia and New Zealand, and whether Sir William Lyne has replied that the New South Wales Government objected to this course; and, if so, whether Sir Alfred Milner was acting on his own motion or by instruction from the Colonial Office.

I have no information as to such refusal or as to such an appeal to Australian Governments by Sir A. Milner. I am making inquiries on the subject. This also answers the question addressed to me by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire.

Are we to understand that the Government did not authorise Sir Alfred Milner to take this step?

I am not prepared to answer that question, lest an inference be drawn that if such an application had been made we should not have approved it. As soon as I know the facts I shall be prepared to say whether we approve what was done.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies how soon it is his intention to issue the proclamation in the English, Dutch, and Taal languages, announcing the intentions of the British Government as to the immediate civil administration of the new South African colonies, and the promise of colonial self-government at the earliest opportunity, as he engaged to do in his speech in debate on 7th December last, and in answer to a question by the Member for Bolton on 11th December.

I have felt obliged to defer to the opinion of both Lord Kitchener and Sir Alfred Milner that during the last few weeks the time was not opportune; but I have asked Sir A. Milner to inform me at once as soon as such action is advisable.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state when the Report of the South African Lands Settlement Commission will be completed and issued to Parliament.

No, Sir. The evidence is not yet in my hands.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any estimate has been made of the amount of the contribution towards the cost of the war in South Africa which will be levied on the diamond mines and the gold mines now in the possession of the British; and whether it is proposed that such contributions shall be levied by way of specific charges or by way of a rateable tax on profits, and, if not, in what other way.

I do not quite understand the allusion to diamond mines in the question. Everything I have said on this subject has related to the Transvaal. But it is not possible at present to make any estimate, or to state the mode in which such a contribution may be obtained, and I fear that the prolongation of the war will delay the date at which I had hoped such a statement might be made.

Does the right hon. Gentleman anticipate being able to make his statement before he 'introduces his Budget?

No, Sir.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Aberdeen, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any order, either from Lord Roberts or Lord Kitchener, or any other general qualified to give such an order, has been issued that the Boers dressed in khaki when captured are to be shot; and, if so, if he can state what was the date of such order, what were its terms, and in how many cases has it been acted upon.

No, Sir. Certainly not.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been officially called to the action of the Corporation of Guildford; in refusing to permit the employment of Reservists in the borough fire department; and whether any other locality can be selected as a suitable headquarters for the Queen's Royal West Surrey Regimental District in the stead of a town of which the municipal representatives act thus towards the men who have served their country.

My attention was not called to this matter officially, but privately. I understand that the corporation has since withdrawn the refusal.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether Lord Roberts's despatch of 14th August, 1900, had been received in this country by 20th September, 1900, and whether the Government was at that date in possession of any further advices from him, telegraphic or otherwise, deal- ing with the probability of the war in South Africa being brought to an early close; and, if any such communications exist, will they be printed as a supplement to the despatches already printed and circulated.

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. There was no further correspondence up to the date named except a telegram from Lord Roberts stating he had information that Kruger and Botha had come to the conclusion that further resistance was hopeless.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many mounted troops have been sent to South Africa since 1st January last, and how many of these are to fill up vacancies, and how many are additions to the strength of the Army in South Africa sent at the request of Lord Kitchener.

The total reinforcements of mounted troops for South Africa sent out since the 1st January amount to 131 officers and 5,530 men, including one officer and 920 men of the South African Constabulary. There are no returns available to show how many of these will fill up casualties or be additions to the strength of the Army in South Africa.

Are these figures independent of General Baden Powell's police force?

I have said they included the men sent out for that force.

Are we to understand that no portion of the 30,000 additional men has yet been sent out?

About 2,000 have started.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the weights habitually carried by our horses in South Africa; whether he is aware that the efforts being made to end the war have been much hampered and delayed by the slowness of movement forced on our troops by the weight placed on the horses; and whether, in order to give some portion of our troops the power of moving quickly, the War Office is, while raising the large number of mounted men it is now proposing to send out, making any special effort to discover and secure the services of the lightest men capable of doing the work required of them.

My attention has been drawn to the matter referred to by the hon. Member, and much thought has been given to the subject. There is no doubt that our horses have in many cases been over weighted, but other causes, such as shortness of food, and the unsuitability of some of the horses, are also in part responsible for the lack of mobility. As regards the weight of the men, the standard has been materially reduced, and no man is now accepted for cavalry of the line who is over 5 feet 8 inches.

Is there any record of the countries from which the horses which broke down came?

I do not think there is a record of each country.

Is it only the Argentine horses that have broken down?

Is it in contemplation to effect any reduction in the weight of the saddle?

Only two or three hours ago I was informed by an expert that horses under the heaviest saddles had gone best.

Did that refer to the American saddle?

Order! These details should be discussed on Supply.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is yet in a position to inform the House as to the extent of the farm burning in the new South African colonies.

No, Sir. The information called for has not yet reached the War Office, but I am informed by Lord Kitchener that some information has been despatched.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Imperial Yeomen who volunteered for a fixed period of twelve months, and who have been in active service at the seat of war for the past twelve months, will now receive the same rate of pay—namely, 5s. per day— that is to be given to the men of the same class who have recently joined the colours.

I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Imperial Yeomanry now at the front will receive the same amount of pay which is now to be given to those enlisting; and if so, have they been notified of such increase.

All the Yeomen will receive the higher rates of pay from 1st February, and any who may have completed twelve months service before that date will receive the higher rates from the date on which the twelve months expired. The exact date of the increase was notified to South Africa by telegram on the 6th inst., but the general, announcement was made on 21st December last year.

May I ask the noble Lord whether the War Office has considered the desirability of extending to the ordinary soldiers, such as the Dublin Fusiliers and the Gordon Highlanders, who have gone through the whole of the campaign, the same terms of pay as are now to be given to the Imperial Yeomanry?

That does not arise out of the question.

I will give notice of the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a Sergeant Major Garner, 13th Battery Royal Field Artillery, who was killed at Farquhar's Farm in October 1899, left a sum of about £200 in the military savings bank; that his widow proved her claim to the money, but has not been able to secure the payment of a single penny of this money; and that all communications with the War Office have proved fruitless; and whether there is any reason for withholding the payment of this sum; and if not, what further lapse of time beyond the eighteen months indicated is likely to take place before the widow receives the money due to her.

A man's regimental savings bank account is kept with his battery or company. No notification of the existence of any account in this man's name has been made by the battery, and only in December, 1900, the widow reported to the War Office that her husband had left an account, said to be over £100. Inquiries were addressed to the battery, but no reply has as yet been received, The remainder of the estate, so far as it is known, has been issued, and the case was, on the 13th November, 1899, notified to the Patriotic Fund Commissioners, who, it is understood, made a grant of 6s. 6d. per week.

Will the noble Lord answer the latter part of the question?

This matter involves communication with Natal, which, as my hon. and gallant friend knows, is very difficult just now. I will try and get an answer as quickly as possible.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that soldiers who have been so maimed in the South African campaign as to be rendered incapable of ever again following any remunerative employment, are being only temporarily relieved by the War Department, and in some cases reduced to pauperism; and if he will state on what principle pensions and allowances are granted to officers, non-commissioned officers, and men respectively, who have been permanently disabled while on active service.

No, Sir; I am not aware of the existence of such a state of things. The Chelsea Commissioners award a temporary pension at first, and when the result of the injury continues, they continue the pension; if the results became more serious, the pension might be increased. The principles on which pensions are granted are clearly laid down in the Pay Warrant, the exact amount within certain limits being left to the discretion of the Commissioners in the case of non-commissioned officers and men.

Does the noble Lord consider that a man who is certified by the medical authorities of the War Office as practically blind, mentally dull, and I helpless as a result of the war is sufficiently compensated and able to keep his: wife and family on a shilling per day?

Order, order !

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the persons dependent upon the war gratuity due to the estates of officers who have died in the service of their country in South Africa are often in needy circumstances, he will state the cause of the delay which has hitherto occurred in the payment of this gratuity; whether such gratuity is subject to any deduction; and, if so, under what circumstances; and whether he will give immediate in structions to secure the prompt issue of this gratuity in the future?

On the death of an officer his estate is wound up by a committee of adjustment as required by the Regimental Debts Act. Owing to the conditions of active service in South Africa there is generally considerable delay in sending home the report of the committee. On its receipt immediate steps are taken to issue the estate, but probate has to be obtained except in cases of estates under £100. The gratuity referred to by the hon. Member forms part of the estate and like the rest is available to meet the debts of the deceased. To expedite matters the gratuity has recently been issued to the representatives on their giving a guarantee to meet all preferential charges.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what inquiries he has made concerning the statement in the House on 11th December, 1900, by the hon. Member for North Louth, to the effect that while Irish soldiers have been amongst the bravest of our regiments, many of their wives and children are in the poorhouse in Ireland; and what have been the results of such inquiries, if any.

As a result of the action taken by the hon. Member for North Louth, some Irish Unions have referred certain cases to the War Office. These are now being carefully inquired into.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, as a result of the consideration given to the matter last year, legislation will be introduced this session to place the cost of catering troops when sent to maintain the peace in disaffected districts upon the local authorities, and to increase the maximum rates allowed by the War Office for billeting.

As regards legislation concerning the incidence of cost of military aid to the civil power, the question should be addressed to the Secretary of State for the Home Department. As regards billeting, the question of revising the rates was very thoroughly considered about a year ago, and it was decided that no grounds existed for disturbing the present rates.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the enlistment some weeks ago of Edward Moore, of Rossville Street, Londonderry, a boy under eighteen years of age, in the Inniskilling Fusiliers; and whether, seeing that enlistment under eighteen years by the recruiting sergeant is contrary to conditions of Enlistment No. 5, issued by the War Office, the authorities will direct the discharge of this boy out of the Army.

All cases of enlistment under age are decided by the General Officer Commanding the district concerned, who will no doubt give the case all proper consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is now able to announce the name of the new Permanent Under Secretary of State for War; and, if not, whether it is his intention to select an experienced military officer who is competent to advise upon the needs of the Army, or to follow the traditions of the office by selecting a civilian.

I shall be glad if this question can be deferred for a few days.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that His Majesty King Edward the Seventh, the supreme head of the Army and Navy, has sworn or declared that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary or any other saint, and the sacrifice of the Mass as they are now used in the Church of Rome, are "superstitious and idolatrous," the Government intend to discontiune the payment out of public funds to Roman Catholic chaplains for celebrating Mass and performing the other functions of the Roman Catholic religion for the military and naval forces in the service of the King who profess the Roman Catholic faith so described by His Majesty's oath or declaration.

No, Sir; we do not propose to discontinue the payment.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state when the Report of the Boiler Committee will be laid upon the Table of the House.

It is not possible at the present stage to give a date for the presentation of the final Report of the Water-tube Boiler Committee. It is, however, the intention of the Committee to present an ad interim Report, which has been specially called for, dealing with some of the points referred to it. I have reason to believe that this Report will be presented to the Admiralty in the course of the next few days.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the opinion expressed by this House in 1891 that the opium trade of the Government of India with the Chinese is morally indefensible, and considering the present demand of His Majesty's Government for Chinese reform, the Government have any intention of abandoning this traffic.

I am not aware that this House in 1891 passed any definite decision upon the subject to which the hon. Member's question refers; but I am aware that in 1895 a Royal Commission, after an exhaustive investigation, reported generally in favour of the system under which the growth and export of opium is now regulated in India. His Majesty's Government have no present intention of altering that system.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will institute an inquiry into the matters in connection with the recent dismissal of certain professors from Cooper's Hill College.

I propose to publish the Papers which deal with this subject, and when published they will show that a most careful investigation, to which full consideration was given both by the Board of Visitors and by the Council of India, was made before the proposed educational reforms were sanctioned.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the generals of the Allied forces in Peking have decided to erect an extensive fortress in the heart of that city for the protection of the foreign legations; whether His Majesty's Government has approved of this project; and whether there is any precedent in history for such a proceeding.

The question of the measures to be taken for the protection of the legations is now under discussion by the foreign representatives at Peking, but no decision has yet been come to in the matter by His Majesty's Government. But I may add that we are fully conscious of the expediency of keeping such arrangements within reasonable bounds.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give any indication of the time when he will introduce the Budget.

No, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say if he will take it before Easter?

I cannot say.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in anticipation of increased taxation, large quantities of dutiable articles are being taken out of bond; and whether he has considered any means of preventing the revenue of the next financial year being seriously discounted in this manner.

Considerable quantities of certain dutiable articles are being taken out of bond, and I believe that much of this is due to the reason suggested in the question. I am considering whether it would be at all practicable to check this by making increases of duty retrospective; but probably the best chock to gambling of this kind would be that those who have put themselves to considerable trouble and expense in this way should find themselves disappointed in their expectations of increased taxation on the articles taken out of bond, and it is by no means impossible that this may be the case.

Does the right hon. Gentleman contemplate introducing the Budget at an earlier date in order to achieve this object?

I must decline to answer questions as to dates.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the quarterly returns of revenue and issues from the Exchequer which are supplied to the press are not supplied to Members of this House; and whether he can see his way to giving instructions that in future these Returns shall be laid upon the Table and distributed to Members.

In accordance with an arrangement made by the late Financial Secretary to the Treasury, 100 copies of the Quarterly Account are sent on the evening of the last day of the quarter, when Parliament is sitting, to the Vote Office.

I bog to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the case of Ben jamin Green Lake, solicitor, sentenced to penal servitude for fraud; whether he is aware that this is the same person who was, up to May last, the chairman of the Discipline Committee of the Incorporated Law Society; whether this is the committee which conducts the investigation of cases in which fraud or other misconduct is charged against solicitors in order to ascertain whether there are grounds for striking them off the rolls; whether he still adheres to the statement of May last that having personally inquired into the allegations made against the Incorporated Law Society, he was satisfied with the explanations given; and whether he proposes to continue the payment out of public moneys of £2,500 a year to the Incorporated Law Society towards defraying the expenses of their investigations into alleged frauds or other misconduct by solicitors.

The committee referred to in the question is a statutory committee of the Incorporated Law Society appointed by the Master of the Rolls, whose duty it is to consider allegations against solicitors of professional misconduct, and report to the Court if a prima facie case is made out. They also report to the Public Prosecutor if there is prima facie evidence of a criminal offence. The person mentioned retired from the committee in December, 1899. I adhere to my statement of last May† on the subject. The allegations into which I inquired related to certain specified cases, and had been made in the public press. I do not see why the Vote should be withdrawn because one person who held a high position in the society has been convicted of crime. I fear that even the House of Commons has in the past suffered in the same way.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if this lawyer had anything to do with the promotion of the Limerick, Kerry, and Tralee Railway?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is now in a position to communicate to the House the steps taken by His Majesty's Government and the Governor of Gibraltar to carry out the recommendations of the Inter-departmental Committee, which were made in 1898, with the object of improving the sanitary condition of the town and garrison, and of affording better house accommodation and recreation grounds for the naval and military forces stationed there.

The recommendations of the Committee were very numerous, and are being gradually carried out. I am not in a position to state exactly what stage has been reached in regard to many of the recommendations, but the Governor will be asked to furnish a report on the subject.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how soon the Report will be presented to Parliament?

I am afraid not.

Has the drainage been completed?

I would rather not answer now. I hope to have a full report before long.

† See The Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. LXXXIII., page 409.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Wexford County Council at a recent meeting unanimously passed a resolution expressing the opinion that the system of levying dues on the net registered tonnage of steamships is detrimental to the best interests of the harbours of Ireland; and whether the Government is prepared to alter the law so as to enable Harbour Commissioners to levy dues on the gross tonnage.

Yes, Sir, I am aware of the resolution to which the hon. Member refers, but as at present advised, I do not propose to take steps to alter the present law of tonnage measurement which is international. It is, of course, open to Harbour Commissioners to endeavour to obtain powers to levy dues on the gross tonnage by means of local Acts. Such powers have, I am informed, been already obtained in several places, notably in Scotland.

Did I under stand the right hon. Gentleman to say the system now in vogue in this country is international?

Yes, Sir.

Has the circular promised last session been issued?

No, Sir, but the negotiations are progressing.

In view of the public anxiety will not the right hon. Gentleman expedite its issue?

It is obviously in the public interest there should be as little friction as possible, and with this object it is desirable to consult the parties interested.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been drawn to certain cases of cruelty to animals practised in angling for song-birds in Cornwall and for albatross on ocean-going steamers; and what steps he purposes taking in the matter.

No, Sir. The subject is not one which comes within the purview of the Board of Trade, nor have I any powers in the matter.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Local Government Board has as yet come to a decision as to the request forwarded by the City of Westminster and other borough councils, in accordance with the London Government Act, 1899, in favour of triennial elections.

I have received applications from most of the metropolitan borough councils asking for Orders directing that the whole of the councillors shall retire together in every third year. There are technical questions of difficulty in connection with this subject upon which I have determined to take the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown. On receipt of that opinion I shall be prepared to come to a decision with regard to the course to be adopted in the matter.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education if he will state how many applications for recognition of schools, or departments of schools, as higher elementary schools have been made to the Board since the date of the Higher Elementary School Minute; how many schools or departments have been recognised under that minute; in how many cases the applications have been declined by the Board; and, during the same period, how many applications for recognition of schools as organised science schools or schools of science and art have been refused by the Board.

I am told that some 190 applications have been made to the Board of Education, but many of these are general and vague and not for the recognition of any specific school. The answer to the second paragraph of the question is, two; to the third paragraph, one; to the fourth paragraph, none.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether the crossing refuges are to be placed in Piccadilly; and, if so, when will this be done.

The matter is not one which is under my control, but under that of the local authority—the City of Westminster.

Will the right hon. Gentleman communicate with the local authorities as to the extreme danger arising from the present condition of things?

It is not part of my duty to communicate with the local authority, but I have no doubt that the publicity which the hon. Baronet has given to this matter will secure the object which he has in view.

I beg to ask the Presdent of the Board of Agriculture whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed at the meeting of the Carmarthenshire County Council, held on the 24th of October last, calling his attention to the fact that the Board of Agriculture had either refused or omitted to make inoculation experiments in order to discover whether the dogs destroyed by order of the Board of Agriculture in the county of Carmarthen, on the ground that they were suffering from rabies, were in fact so suffering; and, if so, whether he will state the reasons for such refusal or omission to make the necessary experiments; and whether he will state the grounds on which the muzzling order now in force in the county of Carmarthen was issued.

The resolution to which the hon. Member refers does not appear to have been received in my Department, but it is clear that it was passed on some misunderstanding as to the facts of the case. The Carmarthenshire Muzzling Order was passed because certain experiments conducted by our veterinary officers conclusively confirmed the opinion expressed by the veterinary inspector of the local authority that a dog kept near Llanwrda had developed symptoms of rabies. Eleven other cases of the disease have since occurred in the district to which Muzzling Orders have been applied, in two of which inoculative experiments were also carried out.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General if he can state to the House what effect the demise of the Crown has upon the representation of Irish and Scotch constituencies.

The demise of the Crown has no effect on the representation of Irish and Scotch constituencies. The 51st section of the Representation of the People Act, 1867, provides that the Parliament in being at the demise of the Crown shall not be determined or dissolved by such demise, but shall continue so long as it would have continued but for such demise, unless sooner prorogued or dissolved by the Crown. As there is only one Parliament for the United Kingdom, this enactment applies in the case of Members for Scotch and Irish constituencies, as well as in the case of Members for English and Welsh constituencies, and the provision in Section 2, exempting Scot- land and Ireland and the election of Members for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge from the operation of the Act, can have no application to Section 51, the terms of which show that it applies to the Parliament of the United Kingdom as a whole. There is no such thing as a partial dissolution of Parliament. I may add that the Statute Law Revision Act, 1878, repeals the words in Section 4 and Section 5 of the Statute 6 Anne c. 7 (c. 41 Ruffhead's Edition), which, until the passing of the Representation of the People Act, 1867, restricted the duration of the existing. Parliament to six months from the demise of the Crown.

What would be the effect of the demise of the Crown before Parliament had met?

That depends on another statute altogether. I shall be happy to show it to my right hon. friend.

I beg to, ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he can state approximately when the Government telephone system will be opened so far as London is concerned.

No definite statement can be made at present.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the system of valuation in urban district councils differs from the English method, he will consider the advisability of introducing a measure to assimilate the law, so as to enable the periodical and general revaluation by local authorities in Ireland.

If the chief object of the hon. Member is to secure a revaluation of urban districts under the existing system which is now being applied to county boroughs, I will consider the possibility of dealing separately with such districts. But to supersede the existing system would not, I think, be expedient and would meet with great opposition from many quarters in which the Irish system is justly considered superior to that which prevails in England.

Are we to understand it is proposed to assimilate the English to the Irish system, which is superior?

I believe in many quarters in Ireland a general revaluation for the whole country is held to be of the highest importance. There would be great objection to having one which was merely local and piecemeal.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a number of farmers on the eastern portion of the Annally (county Longford) Estate have not yet got their vesting orders, although all the necessary papers were lodged fourteen months and in some cases two years ago; can any explanation of the delay be given; and will he call for a report as to the causes of the delay.

Applications from a number of tenants on this estate for advances to enable them to purchase their holdings were received by the Land Commission on various dates between the 24th July last and the 10th ultimo. It may well be that there was delay in the Land Judge's Court. This under existing circumstances cannot, I fear, be avoided. Of the 124 applications, 36 have been sanctioned, while the remaining cases are either awaiting the completion of the inspection of the tenants' holdings, or replies to necessary queries which have been issued from the office of the Commissioners.

Will the cases be settled before Easter?

I should not like to say without fuller knowledge, but I should imagine there will be no avoidable delay.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any report has been furnished to him regarding recent sittings of the Head Land Commission for fixing fair rents on appeal; whether he is aware that within the present month twelve tenants have had to go to Dublin to get their appeals heard; and can he explain why it is that, as was always the case, the Land Commission refuses to come to Longford on circuit to hear appeals; and will he call for a report on this subject.

If the hon. Member refers to a list of appeals from West-meath, which were heard in Dublin on the 30th and 31st January, I am informed that the list contained forty-five appeals, and that there were no appeals in it from Longford, though in some of the cases the holdings were situated near to the borders of Longford. Unless under exceptional circumstances, it has always been the practice to hear appeals from all parts of the county of Wostmeath in Dublin; by this arrangement the Land Commissioners are enabled to provide for such appeals being heard at earlier dates. It is not the case that the Land Commissioners have always refused to go to Longford for the hearing of appeals.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Land Commission has not sat in Longford for a period of three years, thereby causing great loss to the tenant litigants?

They may not have sat in Longford, but they have taken cases in Dublin, thereby accelerating the business, which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, is in arrear.

Will the right hon. Gentleman use his influence to get a change in the rules, so that poor country litigants may not be put to the cost of going to Dublin?

I do not think it would be wise on my part to interfere with the administration of the Land Commission.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether any funds or balance of funds voted by Parliament for the construction of railways in Ireland yet remain unexpended; and whether, in view of the importance of giving railway facilities to connect the port of Drogheda with the Midland counties of Ireland, the Government would be prepared to assist in constructing a line of railway between Granard and Oldcastle, the present terminus of the Great Northern Railway in Meath county.

At the request of my hon. friend I will answer this question. None of the money provided by Parliament for the construction of railways in Ireland is now available for further railway projects.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the Judicial Statistics for the past year, whereby it appears that the county of Donegal, and especially the North Donegal division of said county, has had during the past five years the lowest average per 100,000 of the population of indictable offences in Ireland; and whether, seeing that this division of the said county is proclaimed under the Peace Preservation (Ireland) Act, 1881, although practically in a crimeless condition, steps will be at once taken to have the proclamation revoked.

The first part of the question states the fact correctly. It is erroneous, however, to assume that the question of the removal of a proclamation against the keeping of firearms is determined by considerations such as are urged by the hon. Member. The Government do not consider it desirable to revoke the proclamation.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, though the City of Londonderry is proclaimed under the Peace Preservation (Ireland) Act, 188], so far as regards the carrying of arms, his attention has been called to the discharge of firearms on the 18th December from the city walls, and of a bomb some months ago into the yard of a house in Wellington Street, in the Roman Catholic quarter of the city, and is he aware that no one was ever made amenable to justice; whether a quantity of explosives of the description used at the Orange celebrations held in Derry City was discovered on the other side of the city walls, which resulted in serious injury to one or two boys of the district; and whether an investigation by the authorities was ever made into the above circumstances; and if so, with what result.

There was no discharge of firearms in Deny on the 18th December. On the 11th November a signal rocket, that is to say one of a dangerous character, found under the city wall, exploded and injured a young man. This rocket is believed to have been discharged on the 6th June previously. The occurrences were carefully investigated by the police, but they were unable to make anyone amenable.

Are we to understand that, though the City of Londonderry is proclaimed, the constabulary authorities have no idea of the quantity of arms stored therein?

One can hardly call a rocket a firearm.

The right hon. Gentleman did not answer that part of the question which deals with the bomb.

I think that the bomb and the signal rocket must be the same. I have heard of no other.

May I ask if the discharge of the bomb in Wellington Street was not inquired into by the magistrate, and was not the discovery of the rocket outside the city walls an altogether different matter?

I have done my best to give information. One of these rockets which were discharged on the (5th June last caused injury to the person, and the rocket found on 11th November, to which I have referred, is believed to have been another of those fired on the 6th June. Both occurrences have been carefully investigated by the police.

Have not Orangemen for carrying firearms been fined only one penny each, while Roman Catholics have been subjected to a much more severe penalty?

Order, order ! As the hon. Member did not at once sit down—

The hon. Gentleman is a new Member, and perhaps is not aware that it is his duty to resume his seat when I rise.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he, can state the grounds upon which the widow of the late Mr. Moore, clerk of petty sessions in Longford, was refused a sum of about £300 compensation on retirement because he died a few days before the necessary papers completing his resignation could be perfected; whether the refusal of the petition recently addressed to the Lord Lieutenant on the subject has been in consequence of the attitude of the Treasury; and whether, as this family have been deprived of a sum to which they were legally entitled, steps will be taken to have the payment made to them of this £300.

No application was made by M. Moore, before his death, for a pension r ratuity, w ic could only be granted o him n his retirement from office. There is no power to grant a gratuity to his widow. Her son has succeeded his father in the office of petty sessions clerk. The Treasury are in no way concerned in the matter, and were not communicated with.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what is the cause of the delay in the hearing of a, number of cases in the Tipperary Union in which notices to fix judicial rents for the second terms were served more than two years ago; and whether he will make a representation to the Land Commission on the subject.

A list containing a large number of cases from this union was issued on the 22nd ultimo, and the hearing of this list commenced at Cahir on the 6th instant. There are no cases now unlisted from the Tipperary district in which applications are pending for so long a period as that stated in the question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that the delay in dealing with these cases has prevented settlements for the purchase of some of the property?

I am not aware of that. I think the delay regrettable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of appointing more Land Commissioners?

Order, order !

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether memorials have been received from three Dublin sorters, Sweeney, Kelly, and Farrelly, who, on grounds of age, had, been reduced in salary to 18s. per week; and whether proof could be shown they were aware of intention to reduce; whether, in December, 1897, they were informed that the London Secretary admitted cause for dissatisfaction, and offering the ordinary salary from their nineteenth birthday; and whether the Postmaster General is now prepared to put into effect the promise made by the Secretary.

The Postmaster General has received statements made on behalf of the three officers referred to, and hopes to arrive at a decision in the course of a few days.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the decision of the Postmaster General with reference to the improvement of the postal facilities for Dungarvan has yet been arrived at.

The railway company have been asked whether they propose to maintain permanently at the present hours the early morning train from Mallow to Dungarvan and the evening train from Dungarvan to Mallow. If the reply is in the affirmative, instructions will be given for these trains to be used for the Dungarvan mails.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Irish Lights Board consists of twenty-two self-elected and eight ex-officio members; that the salaries of the officials amount to £5,000 per annum; that the "Princess Alexandra" yacht is used for annual inspection at a yearly cost of £10,000 and that the annual outlay of the Board is about £84,000; and whether the Government intend to bring in a Bill to reform this Board or to dissolve it and appoint a responsible Government department with a competent staff.

The number of members of the Irish Lights Board, as fixed by Act of Parliament, is 22, of which number 5 are ex-officio members, and 17 are co-opted by the Board. The salaries of the officials I amount, as stated, to about £5,000 per annum. The annual cost of the "Princess Alexandra" yacht is a little over £0,000. The annual outlay of the Board is, as stated, about £84,000. His Majesty's Government do not, as at present advised, contemplate the introduction of a Bill dealing with the constitution of the Lighthouse Authority.

Will the Government support a Bill brought in by a private Member for the purpose of reforming this Board?

No, Sir, I can give no such undertaking.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish Lights Commissioners continue to place contracts for the repairs of lightships under their control with an English shipbuilding company at Appledore, Devon, which does not pay the trade union rate of wages; and whether he will suggest the desirability of placing such contracts with Irish firms.

I am informed by the Commissioners of Irish Lights that the last contract for the repair of a lightship which was placed by them with the shipbuilding company at Appledore, Devon, was in the case of the "Gannet," in 1898. As stated by my predecessor in reply to a question from the hon. and gallant Member in February 1899, the company in that case gave an assurance that they were prepared to pay the wages generally accepted as current in each trade for competent workmen in the district. I am also informed that tenders were advertised for in that case, and the lowest was accepted. As regards the second paragraph of the question, I do not think this is a matter in respect of which the Board of Trade can properly interfere, by suggestion or otherwise.

Is it a fact that neither the Government nor the Irish people have any control over these Lights Commissioners?

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

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state the amount of Estate Duty collected in Ireland since the passing of the Finance Act on devolution of tenancies from year to year, what has been the decision of the Irish Courts as to the legality of such duty, and whether the Government propose to refund any duty held not to have been legally exigible.

(1) The amount cannot be exactly stated; it is estimated at £37,000. (2) The decision ! in the case referred to in the question is that what is in Ireland known as "tenant right" comes within the definition of "Agricultural property" in Section 7 (5) of the Finance Act, 1894. The main effect of this decision is that the head rent paid by the tenant, and the expenses of management, are allowable as deductions from the annual value before multiplying such annual value by the number of years purchase agreed upon (but never to exceed 25) to fix the principal value. (3) Orders have been issued that in all cases affected by the decision of the Irish Court, applications for a proper return of Estate Duty are to be entertained.

Have not the Government been ordered to repay something like £35,000?

I do not know; it may be so.

Will the Government consider that honesty is the best policy?

asked if a return would be granted.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if until about 1884 it was a custom to devote a separate sum of £8,000 a year solely to the construction of small Irish harbours; if about 1884 the Treasury absorbed this £8,000, granting in lieu thereof a sum of about £220,000 for creating similar harbours; it this £220,000 was drawn exclusively from an Irish and not from an Imperial fund and is long since expended; and if, under the circumstances, he would consider the expediency of reviving the annual £8,000 which was made until about 1884 for the above purpose.

Down to about 1884 a sum of varying amount was annually voted by Parliament in aid of the construction of minor Fishery Piers and Harbours. In 1883 a sum of a quarter of a million was provided out of the Irish Church Fund under the Sea Fisheries Act for these purposes, and it therefore became unnecessary to apply to Parliament so long as the fund created by that Act lasted. The fund is not yet quite exhausted, but the question of the future policy in regard to such works has not been lost sight of.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in answer to previous questions it has been stated that the fund is exhausted?

No, Sir, I am informed that it is not.

Well, we have been told so for the last seven years.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consent to the appointment of a committee to consider the accommodation provided for Members of this House when their attendance in the House of Lords is commanded by the King, and also as to the best means of securing the orderly and safe progress of Members when they obey His Majesty's commands. The following question also appeared on the Paper:—

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the increase in the number of Members of the two Houses, to the inadequacy of the accommodation afforded on such occasions by the House of Lords, and to the necessity for ensuring better order and greater dignity in connection with the proceedings, and in view of the existence of various precedents in accordance with which the opening of Parliament used to take place in a chamber other than those in which the two Houses habitually sat, generally in the Painted Chamber of St. Edward the Confessor, he will consult with other authorities concerned as to the possibility and desirability that in future when Parliament is opened by the Sovereign in person the ceremony shall take place in Westminster Hall, in order that every Member of the Legislature may have an opportunity of hearing the Speech from the Throne.

As I have already stated to the House, the Government have no control over, and, therefore, are not responsible for, the arrangements which are made when Parliament is opened by the Sovereign in person, but I have it in command from His Majesty to express his approval of the appointment of a Joint Committee of both Houses to consider what accommodation can be provided on such an occasion for Peers and Members of Parliament, and, in particular, whether Westminster Hall could not be utilised.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government contemplate introducing a Bill during this session dealing with the capricious dismissal of teachers.

The questions which arise in connection with the hon. Member's questions are under the consideration of the Government.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the educational measures promised in the King's Speech will include an Education Bill for Scotland.

I am not prepared to say what action will be taken in pursuance of the announcement until the matter has been further considered in consultation with the Secretary for Scotland.

Will it be introduced before Easter?

I have told the House already that we have come to no decision on the subject.