I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Government has yet considered how far it will assist the passages of wives and families of Yeomen who care to settle in our new colonies in South Africa at the expiration of their term of enlistment; and, if so, can he make any communication to the House on this matter.

I am not yet in a position to make any statement upon the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the insinuation of cowardice made against the officer in command of the post at Helvetia captured by the Boers on the 31st December, when that officer was severely wounded in the fight; and whether, in consequence of the distress caused to the relatives of the officer by these insinuations, he will state the facts relating to that surrender.

As a general court-martial will be held on the officer in command at Helvetia as soon as he is reported fit, I am not in a position to make any statement of facts in reply to the question.

Is it not the case that this officer was severely wounded before the surrender took place?

I have no doubt it was so, but I must not go into the facts.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he has yet received any official intimation of the alleged shooting of two British subjects named MacLauglan and Boyd by orders of Commandant Delarey; whether he is aware that Ronald Boyd was a British subject who had only been in South Africa two years, and held a permit from the late Transvaal Government, granted on his taking the oath of neutrality; and whether he will order an official investigation by the authorities on the spot.

I have no official information of the matter referred to. I will make inquiry.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a telegram sent by the Chief of the Staff to General Colvile on 24th May, 1900, to inform him by what route the 13th Yeomanry would join him, did not reach him till some weeks after that date; and whether ho has any official information showing that the explanation of the delay is that this telegram was wrongly addressed to the General Officer commanding the 9th Brigade instead of to the General Officer commanding the 9th Division; and, if so, can he state whether any inquiry has been made into the conduct of the officer who so addressed it, and how he has been dealt with.

The telegram referred to did not reach General Colvile until after the 31st May. It appears, however, to have been correctly addressed to the General Officer commanding the 9th Division.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state how many men have been taken from the Militia Reserve for the army in South Africa, and when reinforcements from that body had first to be called for owing to the waste of the campaign; and can he inform the House how many of the Militiamen now serving were members of the force at the annual training of 1899.

13,574 Militia Reservists have been taken for the army in South Africa. The first drafts to replace wastage left in January, 1900. No figures are available to enable me to reply to the second part of the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether a Militiaman belonging to the Militia Reserve who has been serving in South Africa since January, 1900, and whose time is up next April, can be compelled by the military authorities to serve ten months longer; and, if not, whether he is entitled to get his discharge.

A Militia Reservist when called out for permanent service is liable to serve a year beyond the date of the expiration of his Reserve service if a state of war exists.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that there is dissatisfaction felt by officers of the Militia in consequence of the fact that officers of other Auxiliary forces have had Army rank conferred on them while serving; in South Africa, thus giving them seniority over Militia officers of the same rank, although the Militia is the oldest Auxiliary force; and whether he can remedy this by conferring Army rank on all Militia officers serving abroad in future.

This question is-under consideration. I hope to be able to give a definite answer before long.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether be can state if there is to be a regular training this summer of those Militia battalions which are not now embodied: and, if so, under what conditions.

This question has not yet been decided.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the troopers of Strathcona's Horse upon whom His Majesty bestowed medals will be permitted to wear the ribbon of the medal pending the issue of the medal itself; and whether orders will be issued to general officers commanding districts to authorise the wearing of the ribbon as laid down in King's Regulations, paragraph 2,04:8A.

When the King bestows a medal on a soldier he can wear the medal and the ribbon. When the Army Order regarding the grant of a war medal for South Africa is published the instructions referred to will be carried, out.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether a pledge was given by his predecessor to grant an outfit allowance to officers posted to temporary appointments on the staff; and, if so, whether it has been carried out.

Presumably the hon. and gallant Member refers to officers taken from the Reserve. Retired List, or Auxiliary Forces for temporary staff employment, and requiring an outfit. In these cases the allowance would be given, but not more than one allowance to any individual officer.

Do not officers on half-pay receive the allowance?

I think they come under the heading "Retired List Officers." I am not certain, however, and will make inquiry.

I received a pledge from the late Secretary for War that half-pay officers should have the allowance.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can explain why any exception is made to the giving of a grant of money towards outfit for a soldier from the ranks on receiving a commission; and can he state the amount of the grant usually given, and whether his official information shows that it has been found adequate to cover the expense of an officer's outfit.

The regulations have been relaxed in cases of certain soldiers engaged on active service in South Africa. The amount of the grant is £100. The sum is adequate in the cases of most corps.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that delay in the issue of the definite arrangements and regulations for the Volunteer summer camps increases the difficulty of securing attendance, he will take the earliest opportunity possible of making public these arrangements.

I can assure my hon. and gallant friend that every effort is being made to publish the arrangements for Volunteer camps as soon as possible; but he must be aware that the new arrangements of the present year have involved great pressure in all Departments.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, having regard to the fact that the 1st Seaforth Volunteers reached London from Dingwall at 5.30 on the morning of Saturday, the 2nd February, by invitation of the War Office, to attend the Queen's funeral, will he state why the staff officers in charge of the funeral ceremonies made no arrangements for the part which these Volunteers were to take at the funeral: and will he explain why no information was obtainable at the War Office with regard to the disposal of the various Volunteers who arrived in London from Scotland to attend the funeral.

All country Volunteer corps not included in the funeral procession were formed into a provisional brigade, and positions were allotted to them along the line of route. The disposal of the various Volunteer detachments arriving in London rested entirely with the general commanding the home district.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether parcels sent to the troops in Africa are charged 1s. per pound postage: and whether, seeing that similar parcels sent to any part of Australia, New Zealand, or Canada- only cost 6d. per pound, he can arrange for parcels sent to the troops in Africa, to be charged at a similar rate.

Postage at the rate of 1s. a pound is not charged on parcels for the troops sent from this country to any part of South Africa. Such parcels may be sent to the Cape Colony, Natal, the Orange River Colony, and the Transvaal for a postage of 9d. a pound. For parcels to Australia, New Zealand, and Canada the postage is not 6d. a pound, as the hon. Member supposes. To Australia, by the cheapest route, it is 1s. for the first pound and 6d. for every succeeding pound. To New Zealand as much as three pounds can be conveyed for 1s., the lowest postage; while to Canada the rate is 8d. for the first pound and 6d. for each succeeding pound. The varying requirements of the colonies themselves render it impossible to obtain greater uniformity at present.

But is it not possible to reduce the charge to the troops to 6d.?

I am sure the Postmaster General would be very glad to do it if possible, and I will communicate with him but I am afraid there are difficulties in the way.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state whether the officers and men of H.M.S. "Jackal" were on leave of absence during the month of October; and, it so, on what dates.

The officers and men of H.M.S. "Jackal" were not on leave of absence during the month of October last.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will inform the House of the number of slaves that have received their papers of freedom in the slave courts of Zanzibar and Pemba in each of the years 1898, 1899, and 1900; and if he can give an estimate of the number of slaves still in these two islands.

(for Viscount CRANBORNE): The number of slaves freed in Zanzibar and Pemba during the years L898, 1899, and 1900 were respectively, 2,735, 4,263, 1,685. His Majesty's Agent and Consul General at Zanzibar estimates the present number of slaves in the two islands at, approximately. 50,000.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state what arrangements have been made with the Russian Government for filling up the appointments of British Consular Agents in Finland; can he say at how many and which of the Finnish ports appointments have been made; and, in view of the importance to British traders and shipowners of having in all the principal Finnish ports British Consular Agents to protect and watch over British interests, will the vacancies still remaining soon be filled.

The Consular ports in Finland held by unpaid officers, which became vacant by the resignation of the holders in 1899. have not yet been filled up with the exception of Uleaborg, to which Mr. Blunt was appointed in August last. The paid Consulate at Helsingfors, however, has been re-established, and the Consul. Mr. Cooke, is expected to arrive there very shortly to take up his duties. His Majesty's Government would be very glad to fill up the other vacancies as soon as circumstances permit.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Russian Government has recently endeavoured to exclude the British fleet from certain portions of the Gulf of Pechili, and has claimed the waters of the Blonde and Elliott Islands as exclusively belonging to Russia: and, if so, what steps His Majesty's Government has taken in consequence of this claim.

We have received no communication on this subject from the Russian Government, but the Russian Admiral remonstrated against the presence in the waters of the Elliott Islands of H.M.S. "Plover," which was engaged in pursuing pirates. The action of the Commander-in-Chief on the China Station in sending British ships to these islands appears to be in accordance with our rights under Article 52 of the Treaty of Tientsin.

May I understand that this claim has not been accepted by His Majesty's Government?

Certainly.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the information in his possession shows that there is a decline of British influence in the Chinese provinces bordering on the Yang-tsze-Kiang river; and, if so, what steps His Majesty's Government are taking to restore and maintain British influence there.

There is no information showing a decline of British influence in the Yang-tsze Valley.

I wish to ask the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs a question of which I have given him private notice. It is whether he can give the House any information in regard to the reported seizure by Russia of land at Tientsin, which was mortgaged to British bondholders.

Since I received the private notice I have not had any opportunity of obtaining the last information from the Foreign Office. I must ask the hon. Member to put the question on the Paper.

Can the Under Secretary for Foreign. Affairs say why General Barrow's orders, that the action of Russia should be opposed by force of arms, could not be carried out?

The hon. Member must give notice.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the cable recently laid between Shanghai. Wei-hai-wei, and Ta-ku, other than the portion between Wei-hai-wei and Chefoo, shown in the Estimates, has been laid by arrangement with His Majesty's Government, and to whom it belongs; and whether in case the proprietorship of the cable is divided between the Eastern, Extension Telegraph Company and tin-Great Northern Telegraph Company, the nationality of the persons employed in the offices at Shanghai, Chefoo, Wei-hai-wei, and Ta-ku has been provided for in the agreement; or whether, the Great Northern Company being the Danish company which uses the Russian land lines as part of its system, the new cable is subject to the same arrangements as those which have previously existed with regard to the offices in China of that company.

The cable between Shanghai. Chefoo, and Ta-ku (which does not touch at Wei-hai-wei) has been laid by the Eastern Extension and Great Northern Telegraph Companies, on account of the Chinese Telegraph Administration, under an arrangement which His Majesty's. Government recognises and supports. The cable is mortgaged by the Chinese administrations to the companies for twenty-five years at least, and they will work and maintain it. Wei-hai-wei will be served by a branch line from Chefoo. It is stipulated in the, agreement between the Eastern Extension Company and His Majesty's Government that the branch line shall be worked by British staff, and that all traffic between Wei- hai-wei, Chefoo, Shanghai, and Hong Kong shall also, as far as practicable, be transmitted exclusively by British staff.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state or approximately estimate the amount of unclaimed dividends on Consols and other National funds; of unclaimed deposits and balances in Joint stock, trustees, and post Office Savings Banks: of the unclaimed dividends of joint stock and of limited liability companies: and of unclaimed funds in Chancery and other courts of law; and whether in default of specific information as to the detailed and aggregate amounts of these unclaimed funds, he will agree to an inquiry with a view to their being utilised for the relief of the taxation of the country.

With regard to the majority of the various funds of the nature of unclaimed dividends which are in the hands of or under the control of Government, I will send to the hon. Member the information he desires, but it would not be possible to present the facts intelligibly within the limits of an answer. Perhaps I may take this opportunity of saying that the idea which appears to he prevalent in some quarters that there are large sums of such moneys lying idle is quite a mistake. The total amount is not at all huge, and the moneys are I think in all cases, where of sufficient amount, usefully employed. With regard to funds of a similar nature outside the purview of Government, I have no information, and I do not at present see how it is to be obtained: but I will consider the hon. Member's suggestion.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the title "Defender of the Faith" is to be retained on the new coinage; and, if so, whether he can say what particular faith is referred to.

It does not rest with me as the Master of the Mint to decide on the Royal titles. While these remain unaltered, they will naturally continue to appear as at present on the coins.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, if it is not his business, will he kindly tell me whose business it is, in order that I may ask that Gentleman?

I imagine that, like other matters of the kind, it would be the business of His Majesty, acting on the advice of his responsible Minister.

I beg to give notice that I shall take an early opportunity of bringing under His Majesty's notice the fact that he has no earthly right to this title.

Insolence.

Order, order!

But he has not.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the inconvenience caused by existing requirements, he will advise His Majesty to issue an order under Section 2 of the Promissory Oaths Act. 1871, enabling justices to take the oath of allegiance and the judicial oath before any two justices in petty sessions assembled.

I propose to take the King's pleasure on this matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state how many persons have been committed to inebriate homes under the Inebriates Act of 1898.

I can only give the number of persons received into inebriate reformatories—namely, up to the present time, 257.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say how many-have been committed?

No, Sir, I am afraid not.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the arrest of Walter Mottershead, of Bradford, at 5 o'clock in the morning of the 26th February, in consequence of his child, aged two years, not having been vaccinated; whether he will give directions that such an arrest should not be made at such an hour in the morning; and whether in the event of the child not being vaccinated he can interfere to prevent the man being again prosecuted.

My attention has already been drawn to this case, but I have no authority to give any directions of the nature indicated, or to intervene in the course of criminal proceedings.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will give a Return of the number of cases of lead poisoning in. earthenware and china works during the years 1.890 and 1900, with a statement in each case of the degree of seriousness of the ailment, and, wherever possible, the length of time for which the person was absent from work.

I will give a Return showing so far as possible the severity of the attack, the number of previous attacks and the nature of the principal symptoms; but I am afraid that it is not possible to show the length of time for which each person was absent from work.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider the advisability of recommending His Majesty the King to signalise his accession to the Throne by ordering the release of all the Irish political prisoners at present confined in the gaols of the United Kingdom.

So far as I am aware there are no Irish confined in any prison in England or Wales who can in any sense of the term be called political prisoners. I am not responsible for Irish or Scotch prisons.

What about the prisoners referred to by the hon. Member for Galway who have been convicted by packed juries?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, having regard to the fact that over 1,100 persons are injured and over 50 deaths occur through, accidents caused by covered vehicles in the streets of London every year, whether it is the Government's intention to grant to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis authority to compel proprietors of covered vehicles to have them so constructed as to enable drivers to see passing and following traffic.

I quite agree with my predecessor, who said, in answer to a question last year, that these covered vehicles are undoubtedly a danger, but I am afraid the Government have no power to grant the authority suggested.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if he can state how many outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred this year, whether more or less than occurred to this date last year; whether his attention has been drawn to the danger of introducing the disease by the importation of hides, skins, and offal from countries infected with the disease; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent such infection in this country.

Ten outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred this year. In the corresponding period of 1900 there were seven, but the counties affected this year are only two as against three last year. The possibility of the introduction of the disease by the importation of skins, hides, and offal, as well as by hay and straw, and in many similar ways, has been the subject of frequent inquiry and attention, but while the evidence of actual danger is not clear, especially in the case of the imports mentioned in the question, the inconvenience to the many trades concerned would be out of all proportion to the] risk involved, and there is no precedent for a general prohibition of such imports. It is, of course, the duty of the Customs under the Foreign Animals Order of 1896 to seize, detain, and, if necessary, destroy in specific cases, where there is reason to believe that disease may be introduced.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that in any cases of susspected infection the hides are disinfected?

Of course.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been directed to a speech delivered by his predecessor in office, on 12th April, 1899, on the subject of fire brigades†; whether he has considered the Report of the Select Committee thereupon issued in July, 1900; and whether, having regard to the danger and anxiety caused by the existing state of fire defence, he is prepared to introduce a measure based upon the unanimous recommendation of that Select Committee.

The Report of the Select Committee is receiving my consideration, but I cannot hold out any prospect of introducing a Bill on the subject during the present session.

If a Bill based on the unanimous recommendations of the Select Committee is introduced into the

† See 'The. Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxix., page 901.

It is impossible for me to answer that, as the recommendations of the Committee affect Departments other than my own.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he can say when the proposed widening of Piccadilly will be carried out.

This is a work, as my hon. and gallant friend is aware, which is to be carried out by the County Council, I believe they will be ready to commence it in the ensuing summer.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he would consider the advisability of allowing cabs proceeding to Paddington Station to pass through the gates at Hyde Park Corner along the north side of the Serpentine and out at Victoria Gate.

This could not be allowed without an alteration of the Statutory Rules made under the Parks Regulation Act. I do not think it would be advisable to take any steps for the alteration of the rules at present.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works, having regard to the fact that the construction of the new Inland Revenue Buildings at Edinburgh was for some time delayed owing to the quarry from which the stone was obtained having ceased working, will he say whether a sufficient quantity of suitable stone has now been obtained from another quarry, and what progress has been made with, the buildings.

A sufficient quantity of suitable stone was obtained from another quarry, and the contract was completed in October. 1899.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, will he explain why the mails are conveyed over Kessock Ferry, Inverness, as passengers' luggage; and will he state whether the mails are conveyed over both public and private ferries throughout the United Kingdom under similar conditions; and under what Act of Parliament this practice is authorised.

The Postmaster General is advised that he is entitled to claim that the postman who crosses Kessock Perry with the mails should be conveyed for the charge applicable to ordinary members of the public and their luggage. The conditions under which mails are conveyed over public and private ferries throughout the United Kingdom are not in all cases identical. In England the Postmaster General has, as a rule, a right to the free use of a ferry not only for his mails, but for any officer in charge of them. The enactment bearing on the conveyance of postmen with mails across ferries is Section 9 of the Post Office (Offences) Act, 1837 (1. Vic. c. 3G); but there are doctrines of the common law of England also bearing on the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he can explain what are the hindrances to the adoption by British steamship companies of the Marconi system of wireless telegraphy now in use on board of Belgian and German steamers; whether he can state what requirements are made by the British Post Office which are not made by foreign post offices; and whether such as are proved to be hindrances will be speedily removed.

The only steamship companies who have applied to the Postmaster General are those engaged in the Channel services to Prance. Negotiations are proceeding with those companies, and the Postmaster General is not in a position to give any further information at present.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if the Secretary to the Post Office has received a petition from the employees at the Bolton post office calling attention to certain grievances in connection with the transference of rural postmen to the town, forwarded to him on the '20th November, 1900; if so, can he say when it was acknowledged; and what action does he propose to take in regard to the grievances mentioned therein.

Inquiry has been made, but no trace of the memorial from postmen at Bolton of November last having been received in the Secretary's office can at present be found. A revision of the delivery arrangements at Bolton is now in course of preparation, and in connection with this the complaints about their present duties, which are understood to have been put forward in the memorial in question by the postmen who were transferred from the rural district in 1897, will be duly considered by the Postmaster General.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain why persons who have served as monitors in national schools in Ireland for a period of five years are not granted the same allowances in age when competing for Civil Service appointments as are granted to members of the Royal Irish Constabulary of five years service; and whether he will take steps to instruct the Civil Service Commissioners to have monitors included amongst those classes of persons to whom age allowances are made when competing for Civil Service appointments.

As my predecessor explained on 9th April last, it is undesirable that persons who have been trained at public expense for the position of teacher should be given special encouragement to quit that pro-fession for the Civil Service. I cannot therefore give the undertaking suggested in the second paragraph of the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the Postmaster General is aware of the inconvenience caused to the inhabitants of the villages of Radwinter and Hempstead, in Essex, owing to having only one delivery of letters a day, which makes it impossible for them to get a newspaper on the day of issue, while immediately adjacent villages though further from their post town have two deliveries, and whether the Postmaster General will reconsider the answer communicated last month to the Chairman of the Hempstead Parish Council: and whether he is aware that frequently the walking postman is unable to take parcels duly posted at Hempstead owing to having more than he can carry, and whether he will make inquiry with a view to remedying this state of things.

The Postmaster General has received from time to time applications for a second post from the inhabitants of Radwinter and Hempstead. The matter has been carefully considered, but it is found that the cost of the present service to these places exceeds the revenue from the correspondence, and that the expense of providing a second post is not justified. The Postmaster General is not aware that the postman is unable to take all parcels posted at Hempstead, but he is having inquiry made on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he will state when the proposed experimental steamer service between Mallaig and Stornoway will commence, and for how long this experimental service will be in operation; and in view of the dissatisfaction which exists in regard to the present steamer service, will care be taken that tenders are invited for the new steamer service between Mallaig and Stornoway as soon as the precise nature of the service to be given has been determined.

The institution of any mail service by steamer between Mallaig and Stornoway is dependent upon the opening of the railway to Mallaig, upon the times at which the railway company may finally decide to run the trains, and upon the arrangements which the Postmaster General may be able to make with the company. The question of inviting tenders for a permanent mail service by steamer between the above-named places will be further considered when any service, which it may be found desirable to establish experimentally, has been in actual operation for a sufficient period.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, in view of the fact that the telephone exchange for the Abergavenny district is at Pontypool, he could state whether the transfer of the Abergavenny district to the Pontypool Telephone Exchange area is in any way barred by any condition in the Agreement with the National Telephone Company in connection with the purchase of the trunk lines by the State in 1896; and whether he could arrange for such transfer for the convenience of persons resident in the Abergavenny district and in the Pontypool Telephone Exchange area.

The limitation of local telephone exchange business to defined areas was a necessary condition of the Agreement of 1896, under which the Post Office purchased the telephone trunk wires of the National Telephone Company, and undertook the maintenance and extension of the trunk wire system. The fusion of the Pontypool and Abergavenny Exchange areas as defined by that Agreement would involve the abandonment of its main principle.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that at four o'clock on the afternoon of the 14th instant the last number of The Parliamentary Debates to be obtained in the Library was that recording the proceedings of the 25th February; and, seeing that this represents an arrear of nine or ten days beyond contract time, can he say whether the delay is due to the extra work thrown on the reporters in consequence of the recent late sittings; and whether he will take steps to ensure a more prompt issue of the Debates. In putting this question I desire to say that it implies no reflection on the reporting staff', which I believe is doing its duty very satisfactorily.

Yes, Sir, I am aware that there has been a very regrettable delay in the publication of the Debates this session, but I am informed that within a few minutes of the time mentioned in the hon. Member's question two more daily parts were placed in the Library. I have communicated with the contractors, who inform mo that the delay has been due to the breakdown of a vessel conveying new plant and material for use in the work, but that the plant and material are now in their hands and the arrears are being rapidly made up. I hope that under these circumstances no further cause of complaint will arise. The hon. Member will see that it is not suggested that the delay is due to the reporting staff.

1s the right hon. Gentleman aware that the last number of the printed proceedings of this House in the Library now is dated 28th February—eighteen days ago?

I am not aware of the fact, but I accept the hon. Member's statement. I hope that now the new machinery has reached the contractors the delay will soon be made up.

May I ask where the new plant and machinery came from—was it made in Germany or not?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that one of the proprietors in the parish of Apple-cross, Ross-shire, has refused to give permission for the construction of a cart road between Shieldaig and Applecross; and can the Secretary for Scotland take any steps to secure the construction of the proposed road.

I am not aware of the fact referred to in the first paragraph of the hon. Member's question, and in any case the matter seems to lie with the road authority.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the officials in the Signet Office in Edinburgh decline to signet summonses running in the name of His Most Gracious Majesty King Edward unless the words "the Seventh" are added; and whether, in view of the fact that no Sovereign bearing the name of Edward has hitherto reigned in Scotland, instructions will be given to discontinue the practice in all writs and documents running in the name of the Crown relating to Scotland alone.

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I inquire whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Oath; of Allegiance taken by hon. Members was to "King Edward'' and not to "King Edward VII."?

Is the Lord Advocate aware that, if a rigorous rule were enforced as to the words '' the Seventh," a precedent would be created which was not adhered to in the similar case of William IV.?

The answer to the question on the Paper is that it has been decided, after full consideration, that His Majesty shall sign as Edward VII. all writs passing the signet and other documents running in the name of the Crown in Scotland. The Secretary for Scotland sees no sufficient ground on which to suggest an alteration of this decision as is suggested in the question. In answer to the question of the hon. Member for North Aberdeen, I have made inquiry into the matter, and find that in the time of William IV. signet letters and summonses always ran in the name of "William the Fourth," so that precedent is adhered to. As to the question of the hon. Member for Inverness-shire, I candidly confess I have tried in vain to find a Scotch grievance in the King's designation as Edward VII. It seems to me to be really a matter of convenience of citation, and that it would lead to considerable confusion if the statutes were cited in Scotland as those of Edward 1. of Scotland. His Majesty was proclaimed under the title of Edward VII., and the old idea in Scotland in regard to King James does not arise, because the statutes were not cited in the same way as now.

May I point out that the precedent of William IV. was not always followed?

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland is aware that efforts are being made to induce the Congested Districts Board to construct private roads on certain estates in the congested area.; and will care be taken that the funds of the Board are not expended in the construction of roads which are to be specially under the control of landlords and for their exclusive benefit.

I am informed by the Congested Districts Board that their practice is only to entertain the question of grants for such roads as are approved by the Statutory Authority, namely, the district committee whose application is forwarded to the county council; and they are then further advised by the consulting engineer to the Board. In these circumstances there seems no reason for giving any undertaking to provide against the insinuation conveyed in the latter part of the hon. Member's question.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, having regard to the fact that in 1894 a landowner of Rosehaugh, at Avoch, Ross-shire, obtained a Provisional Order for the con- struction of a harbour, can it be stated whether Mr. Fletcher has since taken any steps to put into execution the terms of the Order; and will he state whether the Order has some time since lapsed.

I understand that the works authorised by the Avoch Harbour Order, 1894, have not been commenced within the prescribed time. If this be the case, the powers conferred by the Order would appear to have ceased.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman answer the first part of the question?

No, Sir, I can only give the answer I have received. The hon. Member must put down any further question.

It is a very unsatisfactory answer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the cases of two prisoners undergoing penal servitude for life, one, Patrick Finnigan, in Mountjoy Prison, and another, Constable Muldowney, in Maryborough Prison, on conviction of complicity in murder; whether he is aware that His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant received petitions from all the public representative bodies, eleven in number, in the county of Galway, praying His Excellency to consider their cases; and whether, in view of the fact that they have spent eighteen years in prison, His Excellency will now give their cases his most favourable consideration with a view to the exercise of the clemency of the Crown.

The petitions referred to were received by the Lord Lieutenant, who decided, so recently as August last, that the law must take its course. But if any new fact has transpired since then it can be brought before the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, who is the dispenser of the prerogative of mercy in that island.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will add to his statement by saying that he will look into the facts of the case himself, and use his influence with the Lord Lieutenant in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy.

I am afraid I could not. It would be altogether outside my sphere.

But is it not the fact that occasions when a Monarch ascends the Throne are deemed auspicious opportunities for exercising the prerogative of mercy? Will the Government not take into consideration the fact that these men have been in prison nineteen years?

Order, order! The question has been answered.

Any facts should be laid not before me, but before the Lord Lieutenant, who dispenses the prerogative of mercy.

Well, I shall certainly bring this matter under the notice of the House.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will take steps to co-ordinate the administration of Government grants for encouraging improvement in the breeding of live stock in Ireland by transferring to the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland the grant now made for that purpose to the Royal Dublin Society.

The grant now made to the Royal Dublin Society for encouraging improvement in the breeding of live stock in Ireland is, by mutual arrangement, administered in co-ordination with the Department of Agriculture. In framing its schemes the Society has conferred with the Department, and has endeavoured to frame its rules so as to avoid the risk of its work overlapping or conflicting with the work of the Department.

Does not the present system produce friction?

I understand that the Royal Dublin Society and the Public Department are working in harmony on this matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say when the Vote for the Local Government Board for Ireland will be taken, and if the Government will provide an opportunity for discussing the case of the Wexford County Council v. The Local Government Board.

This question should be addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury. I am quite prepared to express my opinion in the course of any debate on this matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what is the reason for the delay in carrying out the recommendation of the County Council of North Tipperary with regard to the transfer to the Borrisokane Union of certain electoral divisions in the barony of Lower Ormond.

The general question of the amalgamation and alteration of certain unions is engaging the attention of the Local Government Board. The recommendation of the North Tipperary County Council will be considered with other proposals of a like nature.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many Roman Catholics attended as jurors at last Kerry assizes, how many were ordered to stand aside in the trial of the Glencar prisoners, and on what grounds was such an order given; and can he explain why those prisoners who had given substantial bail for their appearance at the trial, and whom the jury acquitted, were conveyed hand- cuffed in pairs through the streets of Tralee to the county gaol.

I have no information as to the religious composition of the panel. The number of jurors on the panel was 100, of whom 69 answered. In answer to the second paragraph, when the hearing of the cases was adjourned overnight on the 12th instant, application was made to the Lord Chief Justice for the admission of the accused to bail, but this application was refused by the learned judge. The prisoners were then conveyed by car, handcuffed, to the gaol; they were not marched through the streets. They were handcuffed by order of the gaoler, who, as responsible for their safe custody until finally dealt with by the, Court, was bound to take every necessary precaution for their safe keeping.

Can you state the number who were ordered to stand by?

Fifty-four.

Are prisoners in similar circumstances in England handcuffed?

That is a hypothetical question that it would be very difficult to answer.

Are you aware that these prisoners had been out on bail?

I am perfectly aware of that. Under similar circumstances prisoners have sometimes not come up.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman take steps to prevent these things occurring?

It is in the discretion of the officials who are responsible for the safe keeping of the prisoners.

Do you know that the condition of bail bonds is that they are to last from day to day?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieu- tenant of Ireland whether he will state the amount of cost incurred in establishing the Queen's Colleges of Cork, Belfast, and Galway. and also the amount of present endowments and the total amounts of the annual grants since made for maintenance and such purposes.

The original cost of the buildings to the State was £100,000, and additional grants amounting to £138,627 have since been made for new buildings and cost of maintenance. Each of the colleges receives an endowment of £7,000 a year out of the Consolidated Fund, together with an annual Parliamentary Vote of £1,600 in aid of expenses.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that it is the practice of the Constabulary authorities not to allow district inspectors to remain longer than four years in the first district to which they are sent after completing their training as cadets in the depot, he can explain why District Inspector Wallace, of Belmullet, has been retained for twelve years in that district; and can he say whether any other district inspectors in the force have been retained in control of a police district for such a length of time?

There is no regulation to the effect mentioned in the first paragraph. District Inspector Wallace has been retained at Belmullet in the interests of the public service, and several other officers have remained in charge of districts for similar and even longer periods.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that Mr. John O'Malley, a licensed publican of Belmullet, having declined to close his premises on 2nd February, on the occasion of the funeral of Her late Majesty, in accordance with the orders of the police, they entered his shop and only refrained from putting up the window shutters when Mr. O'Malley eventually requested his assistants to close his shop; and, can he state by whose authority the Belmullet police ordered the local publicans to close their premises on the occasion referred to.

The allegation that the police entered Mr. O'Maliey's premises on the 2nd February is without foundation. Several publicans asked the District Inspector on the previous day whether they were required to close, and that officer expressed the opinion, erroneously, that the day came within the provisions of the Licensing Act of 1872.

Will compensation be given to the publicans for their loss of trade through having acted on instructions erroneously given by the police?

I do not know whether the error was corrected in time or not. In the only other instance in which it was made it was corrected in time.

J bog to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will furnish particulars as to the operations of the Congested Districts Board in County Galway, similar to those which he has promised to supply in county Kerry.

The information will be sent to the hon. Member in the course of a few days.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will take steps to extend the powers of the rural district councils in Ireland that will confer on them the right already enjoyed by urban councils to erect artizans dwellings for tradesmen in towns which have not been urbanised under the Local Government (Ireland) Act, so as to enable these rural councils to provide for the better housing of the tradesmen in such towns.

The rural district councils have extensive powers for providing house accommodation under the Labourers Acts. As at present advised, I am not prepared to extend those powers by applying the Housing of the Working Classes Acts to rural districts.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to break down the monopoly?

I do not admit that there is a monopoly. The time has not come to apply to urban districts the powers now exercised in rural districts.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the question?

My reply was based on my consideration of it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the case of Mr. Leslie, who was a party to the recent proceedings in the King's Bench Division in Ireland, the first permission to Mr. Leslie given by the Inland Revenue authorities was to continue to carry on the business of selling intoxicating liquors pending the decision of that Court; and that this decision was given on the 21st December 1900, while the date of the application on behalf of Mr. Leslie for a new permission was the 11th January 1901; can he state whether Mr. Leslie sold intoxicating liquors or exposed them for sale between the 21st December and the 11th January; and, if so, will directions be given to the local police authorities to take proceedings against him for his breach of the law, and will the second permission granted be now withdrawn.

The facts are set out with substantial accuracy in the first paragraph of the question. Intoxicating liquors were not sold or exposed for sale by Mr. Leslie in the interval between the 21st December, when the King's Bench Division delivered judgment, and the 23rd January, when the permission was obtained. The concluding inquiry in the question of the hon. Member for North Monaghan should be addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but probably the hon. Member will be satisfied with the assurance given by my right hon. friend on Friday last.

On behalf of the hon. Member for the Harbour Division of Dublin, I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Excise Bonded Stores, at 12, North Wall, Dublin, known as the Queen's Stores, have recently been sold to a shipping company; and, if so, whether it is intended that the premises be continued as bonded stores; and whether the porters employed by the Inland Revenue in connection with these stores will be continued in the service or receive remuneration if disemployed.

It is a fact that arrangements have been made by the Board of Works (Dublin) for the sale of the Queen's Stores, North Wall, Dublin, to a shipping company; but the Board of Inland Revenue are not aware of the purpose for which the company propose to use the premises. The porters employed by the Board at the stores have received notice that their services will not be required after the 31st instant. They will receive on retirement such gratuities as they may be qualified for under the Superannuation Act.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state how many jurors were ordered by the Crown to stand aside at the recent Waterford assizes in the case of the alleged conspiracy at Tallow, county Waterford; and can he give the grounds on which the Crown Solicitor directed John Power and other jurors to stand aside, and state the proportion of the entire panel directed to stand aside.

With the permission of my right hon. friend, I will reply to this question. There were 120 jurors on the panel in the case referred to. The number of jurors ordered to stand by by the Crown in the case referred to was forty-three. The Crown Solicitor ordered the juror named to stand by, as he did all others, in the discharge of the duty expressly imposed upon him by the circular letter of February, 1894—namely, that while abstaining from requiring any juror to stand by on account of his political or religious opinions he should "direct to stand by all such persons as ho should have reason to believe were likely to be hindered from giving an impartial verdict, by favour towards the accused or fear of the consequences to their persons, property, or trade."

Were these forty-three men ordered to stand aside because their religion has been declared by the King to be abominable and idolatrous?

Order, order! Hon. Members must not attempt to debate the answers.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the conditions under which the salary of the secretary of the County Council of Fermanagh was arrived at, namely, on the suggestion of the Court of King's Bench, that the secretary of the council and the county council should come to a settlement, and an adjournment of the case for a week for that purpose, and seeing that the Court confirmed the order of the Local Government Board against the efforts of the council, raising the salaries of the assistant county surveyors by 50 per cent., he will grant an inquiry if the County Council of Fermanagh are willing to pay the expenses of said inquiry.

I can only suggest, as I did on Friday last, that the best course will be to await the result of the Wexford inquiry.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state when the Land Commission will next sit in Ennis-killen to hear the arrears of appeals to their Court in the county of Fermanagh.

NO, Sir; the Commissioners are unable at present to assign a date.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the frequency of the attacks made on the Roman Catholic Church, Edenderry, Portadown, especially within the last twelve months; whether he can state the number of times in that period the windows of the church referred to have been deliberately broken; and whether any report on the subject has been made by the local police authorities to the Castle; and, if so, whether any action, and, if any, what action, has been taken by the Executive in reference thereto.

Some panes of glass in this church have been broken within the past year on three separate occasions. Respectable people of all denominations have expressed their disapproval of these mischievous and wanton acts. They are believed to have been committed by boys; and windows, I may observe, have also been broken in the Protestant Church, also, I imagine, by boys. The occurrences were duly re-reported by the local constabulary, by whom every effort was made to trace the guilty parties, though, I regret to say, without result.

Will the right hon. Gentleman further inquire?

If it is a question of my obtaining evidence where the police have failed, I doubt if I can succeed.

Has not the right hon. Gentleman received three letters from the Roman Catholics of Portadown on this subject, and not answered a single one?

That fact has not come to my knowledge.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can give the names of the witnesses summoned by Dr. Flinn on behalf of Nurse Joyce in connection with the recent Local Government Board inquiry at Shillelagh; also the names of those witnesses who gave evidence for Nurse Joyce and of those who did not give evidence.

The names of the persons summoned were Mrs. Brennan, Mrs. Nolan, Mrs. Moran, Mrs. Gregan, Mrs. Kavanagh, Mrs. M'Donald, Mr. Nolan, Mr. James. The first four gave evidence, the others either failed to attend the inquiry, or left before it concluded. Three other witnesses who were not summoned also gave evidence on behalf of the nurse—namely, the Rev. Mr. Busher, Mr. Trayner, and Mr. Byrne, chairman of the guardians.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a week ago he told me in answer to a question that sixteen witnesses had been examined?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Chairman of the Board of Works, Ireland, has resigned, and whether his resignation has been accepted; whether any appointment has yet been made to the office, and, if so, whether he can say who has been appointed, and what are his qualifications for the office.

The present Chairman's term of five years expires at the end of this month. I hope to be able to announce the name of his successor in a few days.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the inconvenience to the people of the town and neighbourhood of Clones, by reason of the obstruction to the traffic caused by the almost constant closure of the railway gates across one of the main roads leading into Clones, will he cause inquiry to be made whether a bridge over the crossing can be easily constructed, and if he will order an inspector to visit the place complained of and furnish a report to the Board of Trade of the result of his investigation of this public nuisance and danger.

The questions affecting this level crossing have engaged the attention of the Board of Trade and an inspection was made last year. My right hon. friend will be happy to supply the hon. Member, if he so desires, with a copy of the inspector's report. I understand that the railway company are proposing to construct new sidings with the view of diminishing the amount of shunting over the crossing and have obtained powers for the purchase of the necessary land.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether in appointments to the office of postmaster in Wales, a knowledge of the Welsh language is essential; and whether seeing that correspondents in the west of Ireland have had letters addressed in Irish returned to them as insufficiently addressed or not known; and whether he will take steps to prevent a recurrence of this by appointing for the present one or two Irish scholars to the office in Dublin, and by securing for future appointments in the Irish-speaking districts in Ireland postmasters with a knowledge of the language.

In appointing postmasters at places where the Welsh language is in general use preference is given to candidates who have a knowledge of the language. In the Postmaster General's opinion, no sufficient reason exists for requiring a knowledge of the Irish language from postmasters or other servants of the Department in Ireland.

Will the hon. Gentleman undertake to do what is asked in the last paragraph of the question?

I cannot make any promise. If the hon. Member has any special reasons to advance and will send them to me, I will forward them to the Postmaster General.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been directed to the revision of 1891, under which the scale of pay of the Dublin male supervising force was raised—namely, the scale previous to 1891 £150 per annum, rising by £8 per annum to £190, and the scale after revision of 1891 £200 per annum, rising by £10 per annum to £250; and, seeing that the former scale was retained for a clerks' class, but that all the members of this class in 1891 were advanced to the latter scale, their duties being identical with those performed by the female supervising force, whose maximum pay is only half that of males, whether the Postmaster General in the coming revision will grant the female supervising staff an increase in scale of pay, with the view of allaying the discontent which has long existed; and will he take steps to have open competitive examinations held in Dublin for at least some of the places by which it is intended to increase the Dublin female staff.

The Postmaster General is aware of the nature of the revision of 1891 under which the scale of pay of the Dublin male supervising force was raised; the female supervising force also obtained an improvement of pay and position at the same time. As was stated in reply to the hon. Member on the 7th instant, the scales for the female supervising force are those proper to their class at offices such as Dublin, and no reason is seen for increasing them. It is not possible to say at present whether any of the vacancies for female sorting clerks and telegraphists caused by the revision will be filled by open competition.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can inform the House when the Joint Committee on the subject of the Sovereign's Accession. Oath and Declaration will be appointed; and whether he will consider the advisability of moving an Instruction to the Committee to inquire to what extent the Declaration is objectionable to Roman Catholics and likewise to the members of the Creek Orthodox Church.

This matter has been initiated in another place, and until the House of Lords appoint the Committee, I am afraid we cannot take any steps; but I do not think there will be any delay in appointing the Committee.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question?

I think it would be undoubtedly open to the Committee to take evidence, if they wished to do so, as to the way in which the Declaration was objectionable to His Majesty's subjects.

Can the right hon. Gentleman inform me how many relatives of the King, including reigning sovereigns, belong to the Greek Church?

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the resolutions condemnatory of the portion of the King's Accession Oath offensive to Roman Catholics which were passed by grand juries, county councils, corporations, district councils, and other public bodies in Ireland, and by representative organisations in Great Britain, Canada, Australia, the United States, and other foreign countries, in order that the Joint Committee of the Lords and Commons about to be appointed to inquire into and report on this matter may have the advantage of considering them before coming to a decision on the question.

I do not think it necessary to publish the Return asked for. It will be in the competence of the Committee to call for any information they desire. I should have thought that the general topics suggested in the question are matters of common knowledge; and if they are not, the Committee will have full power to make themselves more fully acquainted with them.

Will the Committee be empowered to take evidence from Protestants who may object to any alteration in the Declaration?

So I should suppose.