I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will undertake not to say or do anything gratuitously which might prejudice the claim of the late Transvaal Government against the Chartered Company being recovered and applied in liquidation of the debts of the Transvaal Government when a change in His Majesty's Advisers takes place.

I am not aware of anything which I can say or do, either gratuitously or otherwise, which would interfere with the action of any succeeding Government in this matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will give facilities for the examination at the Colonial Office of all Papers connected with the Jameson Raid bearing upon the claim of the late Transvaal Government, in view of the probability of a tender being made, as suggested, for any rights the British Government may have against the Chartered Company.

All the material Papers on this subject have been published, and will be found in the Parliamentary Paper, C 9,343.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me access to the necessary special Papers in order that I may not buy a pig in a poke?

I do not know what would be necessary for the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that Ahmednagar, the place to which 500 Boer prisoners have recently been sent, is unhealthy and in every respect unsuitable as a place of imprisonment for men coming from such a climate as that of South Africa; and whether he will consider the desirability of transferring these prisoners to some more suitable place, and whether he will consider the desirability of sending Boer prisoners in the future to Ireland.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a batch of Boer prisoners of about 500 has been deported to Ahmednagar, in the Bombay Presidency; and, if so, having regard to the heat of this locality and to its scanty water supply, will the Government consider the propriety of removing these prisoners of war to some less unhealthy place.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the arrival of 500 Boer prisoners of war at Bombay, and their despatch to Ahmednagar; and, seeing that the Ahmednagar district was last year so famine stricken that one in every four of the population was on Government relief, and was also subject to a water famine, and that these conditions still to some extent prevail in the district, which is liable to cholera, plague, and other Oriental diseases, whether he will consider the advisability of interning these prisoners of war in a more suitable district.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will make inquiry as to the suitability of the climate of Ahmednagar, in India to which place the first batch of Boer prisoners are said to have been consigned, at this season and during the summer months, for men not acclimatised to the heat of the district indicated, in order to prevent undue suffering and perhaps undue mortality.

The Viceroy of India undertook, after consultation with the local authorities, to send the Boer prisoners to suitable places, and Ahmednagar has been selected as one of them. A British regiment is permanently quartered there, and I never before heard that the place is considered to be unhealthy.

I should like to ask the Colonial Secretary to answer the second paragraph of my question.

I have nothing to do with the disposition of the prisoners.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say who is in control of that matter?

The Secretary of State for War.

I will put the question to him to-morrow.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the right hon. Sir H. De Villiers. Chief Justice of Cape Colony, alone consented to the publication in a Blue book of his letters written before the outbreak of the Transvaal War; if at the same time the Colonial Secretary would publish the correspondence of the Chief Justice with Sir Alfred Milner; if that condition was made by the Chief Justice, can he explain why it was neglected by the Colonial Secretary, and will he now publish the correspondence referred to between Sir J. H. De Villiers and Sir Alfred Milner.

Sir J. H. De Villiers made no such condition, and I do not propose to lay any further Papers on the subject.

Did he make any statement that he wished his correspondence with Sir Alfred Milner to be published also? Did he, or did he not?

The hon. Member asks one question in definite terms, and places it on the Paper. When I give him an answer, he asks a totally different question. Let the hon. Member put his question on the Paper.

I will do so for Monday.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will lay upon the Table a further Return, in continuation of the former Return, as to the number of troops now under arms in South Africa, with the other particulars as to the troops invalided, returned, wounded, dead, and in hospital.

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has yet received the information as to the number of farms burned by the Boers in Cape Colony for which he promised to cable.

Yes, Sir; it is now being printed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether there is any, and if so, what, explanation of the circumstance that Lord Roberts's published despatch giving an account of the capture of the Irish Yeomanry at Lindley under Colonel Spragge does not allude to General Colvile's responsibility or culpability for that disaster.

It is not always of advantage to the public service for a commander to publish in despatches his views upon the conduct of his subordinate generals. Such questions are usually dealt with by a separate communication, for the information of the authorities at home.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can explain why has the report made to the Commanding Officer at Bloemfontein by the artillery officer in charge of the guns which were captured at Sanna's Post, on 31st March, 1900, not been published; and whether in that report the circumstances under which the guns were left without the protection of cavalry were detailed, and the persons responsible for the capture of the guns they deserted named.

It has been frequently explained to the House that it is not customary to publish the reports of officers in subordinate command, and it is not intended to do so in this case. All reports received about Sanna's Post were carefully considered and weighed by Lord Roberts before forwarding his despatch on that action.

Did that report give the names of the men guilty of the loss of the guns, which you are suppressing now?

Answer.

The question has been answered. The hon. Member was informed that the report could not be published, and he now asks its contents.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many millions have been spent during the South African operations on clothing, hospitals, and civil labour, respectively.

The figures for hospitals cannot be calculated separately, as the cost is spread over several votes For clothing, the amount is five millions, and for civil labour three millions; of the latter, a considerable portion was included in the heading "Auxiliaries Pay."

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can arrange that the South African medal shall be available for presentation to Yeomen and Volunteers returned from the front at the annual assembly of their regiments and battalions during the present drill season.

I shall be glad to do so if possible. The question will be considered.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, owing to the batteries of field guns purchased in Germany having been paid for out of savings on Votes, an opportunity cannot be given to the House of discussing the value of the guns so obtained; whether, in addition to the admitted weakness in the axles, he has received information that the more important mechanism for running the gun forward into the firing position has proved unsatisfactory; and whether similar mechanism has been adopted in the gun of any foreign Power.

The springs for running the gun forward were found to be weak at long ranges. Stronger springs have been tried with satisfactory results at the longest ranges, and will be substituted for the weaker springs. Guns of this type are under trial in various foreign countries. I do not think any special opportunity for debate can be given, but, on the War Office Vote, very general discussion is permissible.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state how many guns for the use of the Army in South Africa were purchased in Germany between 1st November, 1899, and the 1st March, 1901; what was the total cost of these guns; and how many of them became defective after being used for a short time.

I must refer the hon. Member to full replies on this subject which were given to questions put by the hon. Members for Wednesbury and the Chelmsford Division of Essex on the 28th February and 11th March respectively.†

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the wives of men who married off the strength, with the prospect of shortly entering the reserve, but have been detained with the colours, will be given separation allowance after the period when their husbands have completed their term of seven years, in the same manner as the wives of the reservists.

The wives of soldiers who would have been entitled to transfer to the Reserve had no war taken place will be granted separation allowances. The circumstances of each case will, however, be inquired into, to see that it corresponds with the above decision.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Private Edward Conhoy, late of the 1st Battalion East Lancashire Regiment, died while on furlough, at the residence of his brother, in Glasgow, on the 21st of August, 1899, after having served five years in the Army. Whether the deceased soldier's funeral expenses were borne by his brother; and whether inquiries will be instituted

† See Debates, Vol. xc., pages 35 and 1152.

After crediting the estate with the deferred pay and the Government funeral allowance, the charges for the funeral and other expenses incurred by the relatives exceeded the amount of the estate by 8s. 8d. The creditors were accordingly paid in due proportion. I am not aware that the brother has paid the 8s. 8d. still due.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state why the men of Section D of the First Class Army Reserve belonging to the Brigade of Guards have done no training since 1896; and why, not with standing that they are drawing reserve pay, they have not been called upon to volunteer for South Africa, while the services of both Militia and Volunteers have been asked for and accepted.

The reservists of Section D who were in their 1st and 3rd year of engagement trained in 1899. The whole Section D reserve of the Scots Guards and half of the Coldstream Guards were called up and joined the battalions in South Africa. The remainder were not required, as the battalions of Grenadiers and Coldstreams were able to keep up their full strength without them.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is contemplated removing H.M.S. "Medusa" from North Shields or replacing her by some other vessel; and, if so, how long the Tyne will be without a drill ship.

It is proposed to replace the "Medusa" by another ship during her temporary appropriation for experimental purposes.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state what was the total expenditure on Peterhead Harbour up to the 31st March. 1901; what is the estimated total cost of the harbour; how long have the works been in progress, and what is the estimated period required for their completion.

The total expenditure upon Peterhead Harbour up to the 31st March, 1901, was £398,000. The total estimated cost of the harbour is £972,520. The works have been in progress since the year 1885; the estimated period for their completion was 38 years. It is therefore expected that they will be finished in the year 1922–23.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the dates of the brevet promotion to lieutenant-colonel of the two majors Royal Marine Light Infantry for service in China, which it was stated in the Admiralty official communication on 9th November last would be notified hereafter, have been yet communicated to the Royal Marine Divisions, and what is the reason that such dates have not been published in the Navy and Army lists.

It has been necessary to communicate with the War Office with regard to the date of these promotions. I am not yet able to inform the hon. Member of the decision of that Department, but hope to be able to do so at a very early date.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the circumstances attending the wreck of the "Goonlaze," involving loss of life, on 5th February last, in Bideford Bay, and to the evidence given at the Board of Trade inquiry held on the 18th and 19th instant; whether he is aware that at such inquiry four witnesses gave evidence that they had seen distress signals in Bideford Bay early in the morning of the 5th February; that five witnesses gave evidence that the woodwork of the wreck showed distinct traces of flares or other distress signals having been used; and that no such distress signals were seen by any of the coastguards stationed on the coast; and whether, under these circumstances, and having regard to the dangerous nature of the coast and the advisability of taking every precaution to ensure the safety of sailors and fishermen, he will order an inquiry into the question as to the adequacy of the coastguard service between Hartland Point and Westward Ho!

No Report has as yet been received at the Admiralty from the Board of Trade giving the results of the inquiry into the wreck of the "Goonlaze." When the Report has been received the question of the adequacy of the coastguard service between Hartland Point and Westward Ho! will be carefully considered by the light of the information contained in the Report.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India will consider the advisability of making any reduction in their rates for inland parcel postage; and whether some reduction was actually contemplated within the last two years.

Proposals submitted by the Government of India for reducing the rates of inland parcel postage are now under the consideration of the Secretary of State in Council; and I hope that they will very shortly be approved.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state if the balance-sheet of the Post Office Savings Bank at 31st December, 1900, showed any increase or any decrease in the excess of liabilities over assets, which excess on 31st December, 1899, was £504,928 1s. 10d.; what were the total liabilities of the Post Office Savings Bank on 31st December, 1900, and do they show any increase or any decrease as compared with 31st December, 1899, when they were £130,138,344; what amount of 2¾ per cent. Consols was included among the assets of the Post Office Savings Bank on 31st December, 1900, and does that amount show an increase or a decrease as compared with the amount on 31st December, 1899, which was £67,330,884, and what amount of such Consols is now held by the Post Office Savings Bank.

The balance-sheet of the Post Office Savings Banks Fund at 31st December, 1900, is not yet completed, but I have no doubt that, taking the securities at the market value of the day, it will show a considerable increase in the excess of liabilities over assets as compared with 31st December, 1899, as will also the total liabilities of the fund. The balance of £2¾ per cent. Consols held on account of the Post Office Savings Banks Fund at 31st December, 1900, amounted to £64,737,170, being a decrease, as compared with the amount on 31st December, 1899, of £2,593,714. The amount of Consols held for the Post Office Savings Banks Fund at 31st March, 1901, was £63,934,205.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can inform the House what contribution the shipowners of the United Kingdom make to the Imperial Revenue; and whether, bearing in mind that the increase in Navy expenditure has been mainly incurred in the interest of the mercantile service, he will consider the advisability of imposing a special tax on the tonnage of vessels.

Shipowners pay income tax and other taxes like other persons. They also pay fees for special services to the various Departments rendering them, such as the Board of Trade and the Customs. Some of these are paid direct by the shipowners; others come out of the light dues, which amount to about £500,000 a year, and are collected from shipowners. I pointed out the other day that, in my opinion, shipowners would contribute through the coal duty to the revenue, but I am not prepared to suggest such a special tax as is referred to in the question.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of Mr. Gladstone's statement in 1853 that about one twenty-second part of the income tax was then paid by professional persons, he can ascertain the corresponding fraction paid by professional persons at the present time.

There are no statistics available that would show exactly what proportion of the income tax is paid by professional persons at the present time. But from inquiries made in the year 1895–96, it appears that in that year persons of the professional class paid about one twenty-seventh of the total sum received. It is thought that at the present time the proportion would not exceed one thirtieth.

Can you ascertain the amount of income tax paid by colliery proprietors?

I cannot say, but no doubt it is very large.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether pitch used in the manufacture of patent fuel will be liable to the new coal duty.

The duty of 1s. per ton is leviable on the total weight of manufactured fuel exported, irrespective of its constituents.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the broad principles upon which coal shipped to Jersey is charged the duty, and coal shipped to the Isle of Man is not so charged; and whether coal shipped to the Scilly Isles is liable to the duty.

The principle is that for Customs administration the Isle of Man is part of the United Kingdom, but has the right of adjusting its own tariff, though it is worked by the Commissioners of Customs. There will be a clause in the Finance Bill for preventing the export of coal from the Isle of Man, where, otherwise, there might be made a depôt for coal The Channel Islands are in no way part of the United Kingdom, any more than any other British possession. The Scilly Islands are part of the county of Cornwall.

Is it the fact that while the Isle of Man has the regulation of its own Customs the Isle of Ireland is refused it?

Yes, and I believe that even under the Home Rule Bill Ireland was not to have control of her Customs.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has yet decided upon the extent of the modification he will make in the coal duty in respect of contracts entered into prior to its imposition, the nature of the contracts to which the concession will apply, and its duration; and whether he will make known his decision in time to allow the electors of the Monmouth Boroughs an opportunity of forming a judgment upon the value of the concession before recording their votes at the forthcoming election.

The contracts which have been sent in will be examined with the utmost despatch, but it will certainly be some days before I am in a position to make any definite announcement on the subject. I am not dealing with it with any view to the Monmouth Boroughs election.

Can the right hon. Gentleman hold out any hope of a decision before the election takes place?

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if, before the Report stage of the Ways and Means Committee (Coal) Resolution, he will lay upon the Table a Return showing the export of seaborne coal for the years 1890 to 1900, inclusive, from the United States of America, India, Australasia, and Japan to, say the half dozen countries to which the largest quantities are in each case shipped; and if it is not practicable to issue such a Return in time, will he arrange that the information shall be furnished to any Member who may apply at the Board of Trade.

No. Sir, it is not practicable to prepare such a Return within the time specified, and I am not convinced that its utility is sufficient to justify the very considerable labour entailed in its preparation.

I only ask for a Return as to half a dozen countries.

Yes, but it would be very voluminous.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state when he proposes to issue the memorandum on the Factory Bill which he promised in his opening statement.

I do not think it is quite correct to say that I promised the memorandum. It would be a matter of extreme difficulty, and to fully explain the measure it would have to be as long as the Bill itself, while a short memorandum, I am afraid, would serve no useful purpose. I hope, having regard to the fact that the Bill itself as well as the Consolidation Bill, is now in their hands, hon. Gentlemen will do without a memorandum.

Then I take it nothing further will be done in the matter?

That is so. I cannot do it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the dangerous condition of various disused quarries on Halkyn Mountain, Flintshire, notably the quarries known as Cop-y-frân, Bryn-y-garreg, and Hagnallt respectively, owing to the imperfect state of the fencing around them; and whether the fences which have been placed round some of those quarries by the Crown authorities have repeatedly been removed, or partially removed, by wilful persons, whom the police have not as yet been able to bring to custody; if so, whether steps will be taken by the county police authorities in future to put a stop to the wilful damage to the fences, and ensure the safety of the public using the mountain paths.

I have made inquiry with regard to the quarries mentioned in the question, and am informed that two of them are in a dangerous state through damage to the fencing. There appears to be some doubt as to the manner in which the damage has been caused, and the Police Report which I have received states that in some cases, at any rate, it has been caused by cattle. The matter is not one in which I have any jurisdiction, but I will communicate with the Office of Woods upon the subject.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if the Government, recognising the hardship inflicted on Scottish teachers who were in office before the passing of the Teachers' Superannuation Act, inasmuch as by their acceptance of that Act they are deprived of any pension from their school boards, will grant to such teachers, on their being compelled to retire, such augmentation of their superannuation allowance as will make their pensions equal to those of teachers coming tinder the Act after it became law.

The amount of the superannuation allowance under the Teachers' Superannuation Act is fixed by the terms of the Act, and the Government have no power to increase that allowance. It is made to teachers in office before the passing of the Act on a higher scale than to others. But I am not prepared to admit that they can establish a claim to be put on a level with teachers who contribute to the Annuity Fund during the whole of their service. The acceptance of the Act by existing teachers was optional, but they were aware when exercising their choice that the acceptance of the Act deprived them of any pension from a school board.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland is aware that the University of Edinburgh in its public examinations for the allocation of bursaries awards to the papers given in Greek double the number of marks given for either French or German; and, in view of the fact that this action on the part of the University Board places students of French and German at a disadvantage in competing against students of Greek, and may tend to discourage the study of the two former languages, will he consider the expediency of suggesting to the authorities the advisability of rendering the difference less pronounced.

I understand that the regulations with regard to marks in the examinations, as settled by ordinance, which was submitted to, and approved by, Parliament, are as indicated in the hon. Member's question. The matter is not one which falls within the functions of the Secretary for Scotland, and he does not think that it would be expedient for him to make suggestions to the university authorities on the subject.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education if he is aware that the proposed addition to Article 101 of the new Code, raising next year the minimum age of the scholars attending classes in cookery, gardening, and manual instruction, will have the effect in small schools of closing useful classes already in existence, and of preventing new classes from being opened in these subjects, owing to the insufficient numbers of children above the compulsory school age; whether, if this is so, he will consent to some modification of the Article, which shall permit of the continuance and development of such classes for children above the age of eleven with the consent of His Majesty's inspector.

I am not aware that the notice of the probable modification of Article 101 in next year's Code will have the effect which the hon. Member anticipates. The minimum age for manual instruction is practically unaltered in this year's Code, and will remain unaltered in next year's. The question whether a lower age than that prescribed for manual instruction can be retained for cottage gardening or any other of the subjects of instruction for which special grants are made shall receive careful consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under existing regulations girls under the age of twelve years may not learn cookery, but over twelve are compelled to learn chemistry?

The hon. Member is entirely mistaken. There is no such regulation.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if he is aware that the importation of live pigs from Ireland into Wigtownshire, through the port of Stranraer, has been prohibited by the Local Government Board for Scotland for the past two years, inconsequence of the supposed prevalence in Ireland of swine fever; and whether, seeing that this fever is not now prevalent in Ireland, he will direct that the port of Stranraer be opened for trading purposes as usual.

The County Council of Wigtownshire have prohibited the import of live pigs from Ireland into any portion of that county, and the continuance of that prohibition is a matter within their discretion. They have of course no power to prevent the importation, of pigs at Stranraer, if it is intended to convey them direct to a place outside the county.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he will take steps to secure lockers for those Members of the House who have not yet got them.

I will undertake to bring the hon. Member's suggestion before the Committee, which is now sitting, on the House of Commons Accommodation, for their consideration.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General whether he can state to what date has the application of the compulsory clauses of the Land Transfer Act, 1897, to the City of London been postponed, and why has any postponement taken place.

The postponement operates until 1st January, 1902. The Lord Chancellor received a deputation from the City last February, who signified that objections had been raised to the application of the Act to the city; the Lord Chancellor considered that time was required to receive and consider the details of such objections, and agreed to recommend the postponement accordingly.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can say if the promised experts on flax growing have been appointed in. Ireland; and, if so, in what districts; and, if such appointments have been made, whether he can say why preferences have been given to some portions of Ireland and not to all.

Four experts have been appointed. One, an expert in scutching, is available for any part of Ireland. The other three are experts in the cultivation of flax; one of them is stationed in the county of Londonderry, and two in Down.

Why have the counties of Derry and Down thus been favoured and other Ulster counties had no experts sent them?

We have had great difficulty in securing the services of experts, but we hope to train Irishmen for the posts, and they will be sent to other counties.

Where did the experts come from?

Three came from abroad. We have no experts in Ireland at present, but we hope to produce some.

Can you give the House the names of the experts?

I have no doubt I could if I had notice, but I do not see that any great public advantage would be derived by doing so.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the profits arising from the State Railways in Now Zealand for last year amounted to £1,621,000 sterling; and whether the Government will consider the advisability of adopting a similar system in Ireland, with a view to reduce taxation and to increase transit facilities.

At my right hon. friend's request, I will reply to this question. The net receipts of the Govern- ment railways in New Zealand for the year ended 31st March, 1900, amounted to £571,533. In answer to the second paragraph, I have nothing to add, at present, to the statement already made by me.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the hours of work and duty the indoor tradesmen attendants are compelled to serve under existing rules in the Criminal Asylum, Dundrum; whether it can be arranged for such employees to finish after a fair day's work in confined workshops without compelling them to do duty in wards; whether he is aware that a memorial was presented to the inspectors; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made, with the object of shortening the hours of the persons referred to.

The tradesmen attendants have not been asked to perform any duties outside their agreements. The Inspectors of Lunatic Asylums are now making inquiries into the whole subject, and on receipt of their Report I will again communicate with the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the auditor of the accounts of the county council of Monaghan disallowed several sums that were allowed to the rate collectors as irrecoverable rates in that county, on the technical grounds that the Local Government Board were not informed thereof; whether he is aware that, before these allowances were made to the rate collectors, their accounts were checked by the district council, and amounts certified irrecoverable; and whether he will direct that the surcharge made against three members of the county council of Monaghan will be remitted.

The payments to the collectors were made in contravention of Aritcle 3 of the County (Poor Rate Collectors) No. 2 Order of 1899, and were disallowed, in consequence, by the auditor. It is open to the members of the county council to appeal against the decision of the auditor pursuant to Section 68 of the Local Government Act, 1898, and any such appeal, if lodged, will be considered.

By whom will the appeal be considered?

By the Local Government Board. The surcharge must be made if the law is not conformed with, but there is an appeal on the equity of the transaction to the Local Government Board.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, having regard to the fact that the Probate Duties Act of 1888, which contributed to the superannuation of poor law officials in Ireland, was based on the amount of superannuations paid in the year 1887, whether he can state in how many unions in Ireland there were officials getting pensions in that year, and the amount paid in each union; and whether, in case of a larger number fo superannuations of poor law officials in the future than took place in 1887, will a corresponding increase take place in the probate duties grant to Ireland.

The amount of Ireland's share in the Probate Duty Grant is determined in accordance with Treasury regulations under the Finance Act of 1894. The distribution only was based on the salaries, remuneration, and superannuation allowances paid to officers in 1887. Neither an increase in such payments nor a redistribution between local bodies would affect the total amount payable to Ireland.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if it is his intention, on behalf of the Government, to propose to supplement the pension fund proposed to be created under the Poor Law Officers (Ireland) Superannuation Bill by a public grant; and, if so, to what amount, and from what source.

I cannot foreshadow Amendments, which might or might not be advisable to a private Bill. All the more since, as I have stated, the attitude of the Government towards that Bill will largely depend on the result of an actuarial examination into its ultimate effect on the rates.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has made inquiries as promised into tie facilities proposed to be given for the training of girls as assistant nurses in Irish workhouses, which would enable him to grant a Return showing the number of trained and untrained nurses serving in Irish workhouses, the salaries paid to trained and untrained nurses, and the probable cost of complying with the Order of the Local Government Board as to qualified trained nurses in such institutions.

A Return is in preparation, and will shortly be presented to Parliament.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the reason which guided the Local Government Board in declaring that the area of charge for the cost of a new burial ground at Ardagh should be the Longford Dispensary District, which would include the urban district of Longford; whether he is aware that prior to the passage of the Local Government Act the township of Longford formed part of this district; and, can he state the grounds upon which the Local Government Board have now varied this order, so as to make the area of charge the whole union of Longford instead of the dispensary district as at first arranged, including the urban district of Longford.

On the 19th January, 1898, the Local Government Board, at the request of the rural sanitary authority, fixed the area of charge for this work on the electoral divisions constituting the Longford Dispensary District. The reply to the second paragraph is in the affirmative. The variation of the original order has not been made by the Board, but is the result of the Local Government Act itself, as, under Section 234 of the Public Health Act of 1878, amended by Schedule VI of the Local Government Act and Article 36 of the Adaptation of Irish Enactments Order, 1899, burial ground expenses are now "district charges." This case is, therefore, no exception to the general rule.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the variation of the original arrangement is causing great friction between local authorities in Ireland, and will he include in the proposed Provisional Order some change which will obviate this?

I cannot give so general an undertaking. I am, however, looking into the whole question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will grant a Return showing the average yearly committals to industrial schools in Ireland for the year preceding the 1st October, 1898, and two subsequent years; and whether the Government intend introducing legislation this session dealing with reformatories and industrial schools in Ireland; and, pending such legislation, the Lord Lieutenant will withdraw the circular issued to Irish magistrates, dated 1st October, 1898.

The number of children committed to industrial schools in Ireland during the year ended the 30th September, 1898, was 1,338. In the two succeeding years the numbers were 939 and 985 respectively. A Bill dealing with reformatory and industrial schools has been prepared, but I cannot undertake to introduce it during this session. It is not proposed to withdraw the circular of October, 1898.

Will the right hon. Gentleman have the Bill printed at once?

It would be a most unusual course to print and circulate it in a session in which it was not to be introduced.

But surely it is not unreasonable that Irish Members should desire the information.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what was the amount of the last poundage rate levied (1) in the town of Castlerea in connection with the Castlerea waterworks, and (2) the last special rate levied on Ballaghaderreen for the Ballaghaderreen waterworks; (3) what would be the water rate on the town of Frenchpark under a loan for the proposed Frenchpark waterworks, and for how much of it would the landlord be liable if the expenses were a townland charge, the same as in Castlerea and in Ballaghaderreen in the one union.

The answers to the first, second, and third queries are 1s. 7½d., 1s. 7d., and 10d. in the £ respectively. Frenchpark is not a town or township under municipal government, and is really a village, with a population of 305 persons. The landlord would pay one-half in any case, whether the area is a limited one or the whole rural district.

Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that Castlerea and Ballaghaderreen are not under municipal government?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that an application has recently been made to the Land Commission for an advance on behalf of John Gill, a tenant on the King-Harman (County of Longford) Estate; by what right, when Gill had signed his agreement to purchase his holding at £500, a further sum of £240 in cash was demanded; is he aware that only one year's rent Was due by Gill, which he has since paid; and will he explain how, when an agreement is signed and the necessary affidavits sworn, any further demand can be made upon the tenant.

The question appears to be based on a misapprehension of the facts. The tenant agreed to purchase his holding and some additional land for a sum of £690, of which £550 was to be advanced by the Land Commission, and the balance (£140) paid by the tenant in cash. The agreement was verified by the affidavit of the tenant. A dispute having subsequently arisen as to the terms of the agreement it was dismissed by the Commissioners, and no demand was made by them for payment of the cash portion of the purchase money.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the tenant was not cognisant of the contents of the agreement when he signed it, and did not know he would be called upon to pay £240 in cash in addition to the £500 agreed on?

No; my information is that the agreement was verified by the tenant's affidavit.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been directed to the proceedings of the Cork County Council, on the 16th instant, when a letter was received from the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction informing them that the department was prepared to make loans to creameries for the erection of plant for the process of Pasteurisation, and when the county council unanimoulsy passed a resolution protesting against the allocation of public funds by the Department solely in the interests of creameries, while apparently making no provision for improving the dairy industry in other districts of the county by loans on like terms to dairy farmers to purchase hand separators and improve the condition of their own dairies; and if, before public funds are used solely in the way proposed, the Council of Agriculture will be called together to discuss this question and advise the Department as to the best means of improving the dairy industry generally throughout the county of Cork.

I stated on Monday last that the question of making loans for the purchase of separators was engaging the attention of the Department. The matter will be brought before the Council of Agriculture at its meeting next month.

Will a new policy be carried out without consulting the council?

We can only act with the appliances placed at our disposal.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that members of the Royal Irish Constabulary force have taken evicted farms in Ireland; and whether, in view of the unpopularity of this action, he will consider the advisability of taking steps to cause its discontinuance.

Some three or four members of the Constabulary have taken evicted farms. They are prohibited under the regulations from themselves taking part in the working of land, whether evicted or otherwise. But this prohibition is personal to members of the force, and it is not proposed to extend it.

Is it not distinctly against the rule for members of the Royal Irish Constabulary to take farms?

As I understand it, the regulations lay it down that they shall not engage in the working of farms; but they may hold land elsewhere than in the county in which they are stationed.

Are we to understand that the wives and children of the men may take and work evicted farms?

We can draw no distinction between evicted and other farms.

Will you grant the wives separation allowances?

Are these men, the custodians of law and order—

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a serious outbreak of small-pox has occurred in Lisburn, and whether he can state what measures have been taken to stamp out this outbreak of small-pox.

The medical inspector of the Local Government Board has conferred with the local authorities on the steps to be taken for preventing the spread of the disease. They are fully alive to the importance of taking effective precautionary measures, and are at present considering the question of providing an isolation hospital.

Will steps be taken to enforce the vaccination laws?

Does the hon. Member mean to suggest that the law is not enforced? I am not aware of it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the estate of David Finlay and others, situate in the county of Cavan, has been in the Court of Chancery during the past ten years for the purpose of sale, and that the solicitors and receiver of the estate, with the sanction of the Court of Chancery, got the tenants on the estate to sign agreements to purchase their holdings through the Land Commission over three years ago; can he state what has been done with these agreements; and will the Court of Chancery direct the receiver to refund to the tenants the money that has been collected from them for rent instead of interest since the agreements were signed.

The sale of this estate is not taking place under the 40th section of the Act of 1896. An order for the sale of the estate was made in 1890, and about three years ago the tenants signed provisional agreements to purchase. I am informed it is no part of the agreements that the tenants should be free from rent pending the carrying out of the sale; in any case, such an arrangement would be nugatory, as it has not received the sanction of the Land Judge.

Why have the provisions of the 35th section of the Act of 1896 been set aside?

This case does not come under the Act of 1896. The estate was sold before that Act was passed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether prisoners who become insane while awaiting trial, or during their sentences, in Ireland are maintained out of Imperial sources, or out of the funds for the maintenance of the lunatic poor.

Prisoners who become insane while awaiting trial, or during their sentences, are removed to the lunatic asylum of the district in which the gaol is situate; their cost, consequently, falls on the funds for the maintenance of the lunatic poor. In exceptional cases prisoners who become insane while serving a sentence of imprisonment are sent to Dundrum Central Criminal Lunatic Asylum, maintained out of Imperial sources, but prisoners awaiting trial cannot be committed to that asylum, and must be transferred to the district lunatic asylum.

Is it not the fact that in England, when prisoners become insane while in prison, they are sent to prisons for the insane, and not to public asylums? Cannot the same practice be carried out in Ireland?

The accommodation for State prisoners in Ireland is very limited, but I am considering what can be done. I see the point raised by the hon. Member.

Yes, it is very hard upon Irishmen.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Fermanagh Roman Catholic Board of Education acknowledge any obligation to give effect to the proposal, dated 20th October, 1886, of their late chairman undertaking to spend half the Roman Catholic portion of the endowment in maintaining an intermediate school in Enniskillen; and, if so, when they propose carrying out that proposal; whether he is aware that the present chairman of the Board sent a written statement to the Commissioners of Education, dated 3rd January, 1900, stating that now that it is known that the Roman Catholics of Enniskillen desire an intermediate school in their town it may be taken for granted that no effort will be spared to have that wish satisfied; and, whether any steps have been since taken to carry out this undertaking; and, if not, what reasons exist why it should not be carried out.

The Commissioners are not aware that the Fermanagh Roman Catholic Board of Education has made any such acknowledgment as that suggested. The Bishop of Clogher, who subsequently became chairman of the board, wrote a letter in January, 1900, which suggested that, if a local fund was raised in Enniskillen, it would be possible to establish an intermediate school. No further steps seem to have been taken, and the powers of the Fermanagh Board under the scheme have lapsed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in the case of Deane v. Boyle, under the Truck Acts, the amount of the fine was returned to the defendant by order of the Court or under instructions by the Executive Government; and whether any communication was made to the Home Office before the repayment was made.

. It having been decided by the High Court in one case that the offence charged did not come within the Truck Act, the fines imposed by the magistrates in several other cases of an identical character were remitted by the Irish Executive after consultation with the Home Office.

Were the magistrates communicated with?

No. They decided that certain cases came within the Truck Acts, and the High Court took the opposite view with regard to one which was accepted as a test case.

Were the cases on all fours?

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether the Irish Government are taking steps to institute proceedings against the editors of the Freeman's Journal and Evening Telegraph respectively for alleged contempt of court in connection with the recent case of the Crown v. P. A. M'Hugh, M.P.; if so, what are the grounds on which these proceedings are taken, and under what statute; and are there any other newspapers, either in Ireland or England, which commented upon the disagreement of the first jury who tried the case to be proceeded against.

An application for an attachment for contempt of court on the 12th February was made against the journals mentioned. The contempt consisted in publishing comments on a pending prosecution calculated to prejudice the fair trial of the issues raised. The application was grounded on the common law, not on any statute, and is not yet disposed of. I am not aware that comments of the same character were made by any other journals.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that The Times newspaper commented on the first disagreement of the jury?

The comments in the journals mentioned in the question were comments to prejudice the trial of the action.

They were comments against the action of the Crown.

On this day week we shall raise the entire question.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will pack a jury to try The Times.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether the Land Commission are empowered to make it a condition of any advance of money on their part for the purchase of a large grass farm that the intending purchaser should allot a portion of such grass farm to small tenants in the neighbourhood, with the object of increasing such small holdings.

The reply to this question is in the negative.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that some firms engaged in the manufacture of writing and copying inks in Ireland have recently requisitioned to be placed on the list of contractors to the Stationery Office and other Government Departments in that country; whether samples have been sent to His Majesty's Stationery Department for examination; and whether, in view of a declaration made by Ministers in this House that all goods for use in this department should be of Irish manufacture, he will use his influence to have Irish-made copying and writing ink ordered for the use of the Government Departments in Ireland.

The facts stated in the first two paragraphs are correct. The application is now under consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that Mr. J. P. O'Brien, of Dublin, an ex-political prisoner, who is at present in London suffering from ill-health, has been subjected to surveillance by Scotland Yard officers; and that, on Tuesday evening last, Inspector Hedley and another officer called at the house, 15, Felix Street, Hackney, where Mr. O'Brien was on a visit to his brother, and questioned him as to his identity and movements; will he say what explanation the police authorities have to offer for the action of these officers; and whether it is with the sanction of the Home Office that Mr. O'Brien has been subjected to this surveillance.

The officers acted in this matter in the ordinary course of their duty and not under special instructions. I understand that on the occasion of their calling on Mr. O'Brien they told him they had done so under a misapprehension, and that he was not the man they were looking for, and that Mr. O'Brien accepted the apology.

Were they justified in going to a cemetery during the interment of a gentleman and causing great inconvenience there?

Order, order!

That took place yesterday.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the fact that the London School, Board, at its meeting yesterday, resolved to abandon any further appeal against the Cockerton judgment; and whether, this being so, he is prepared now to state what the Government's intentions are in respect of the situation created by that judgment.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, seeing that the London School Board has decided not to appeal to the House of Lords on the Cockerton case, His Majesty's Government will now proceed, by a short Bill and by an amendment of the Minute of April, 1900, to egalise the higher education given by school boards in higher grade and science schools, and the admission of adults to evening continuation schools under school boards.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is intended to introduce an Education Bill this session; and, if so, will this be done before or after Whitsuntide, and in which House of Parliament.

I will answer all the questions with regard to the Education Bill at the same time. We propose to introduce such a Bill in this House, probably before Whitsuntide, but as to that I cannot give any assurance.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us a definite assurance by the end of next week? The matter is one of grave importance.

No, Sir. I do not know that I can do that. I have informed the hon. Gentleman that the Government intend to introduce a Bill on this subject.

May I point out that my question deals with the fact that the School Board for London has abandoned its appeal in respect to the Cockerton judgment, and may I ask the First Lord whether the Bill will cover the points raised by that judgment?

I think the hon. Gentleman had better wait until the Bill is introduced.

May I ask whether, apart from the Bill, any steps will be taken to deal with the schools affected by this judgment?

The necessity for dealing with anything outside the Bill evidently cannot be considered with advantage by the House until they seethe Bill.

May I ask the Leader of the House if it is not a fact that the Bill promised by the Government is to deal with secondary education, and that the difficulty which has arisen is a very serious one—

Order, order! The hon. Member is now entering upon a discussion of the right hon. Gentleman's answer.

May I ask whether some steps will be taken to enable those children who are taking advantage now of the higher education under the School Board to continue it, irrespective of whatever the Bill may do?

The hon. Member is asking a question as to what is proposed to be done by the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman has already stated that the House had better wait until the Bill is introduced.

No, Sir. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman not anything arising out of the Bill, but whether some steps will be taken to prevent those children who are now attending the schools being struck off those schools in October, prior to the passage of the Bill.

I hope that the 1st October will not be prior to the passing of the Bill. I shall be very much surprised if it is. I have already indicated to the House in answer to questions dealing with the Cockerton judgment that the Government intend to introduce an Education Bill. I should have thought that that general statement would be sufficient for hon. Members until they see the details of the Bill.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state when the Joint Committee appointed to consider the various charitable agencies relating to the widows and orphans of soldiers and sailors, the members of which were appointed on 27th March last, will meet to commence its duties.

Has not the Committee been moved from the other House and appointed?

This is a question which should be addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury.

As the First Lord has probably more knowledge than the right hon. Gentleman, I will ask him if the names have not been settled a long time in both Houses? Can he say when the Committee will meet to take evidence?

I believe the hon. Member is quite correct, and that the names have been agreed upon by both Houses. By the immemorial usage of Parliament, it rests with the House of Peers to determine when the Committee shall meet, and I do not know why the delay has occurred. But I will make it my business to find out.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury can he state whether the Commission or Committee appointed to inquire into the safety of the harbour and works on the western side of Gibraltar and the proposal to construct a harbour or works on the eastern side have yet sent in their Report; and, if so, when was it received; is the Report unanimously agreed to by the four members of the Commission or Committee, or is there any divergent Report by a minority of the members; and do His Majesty's Government propose to lay the Report upon the Table of this House; if not, do His Majesty's Government propose to communicate to the House the general purport of the Report; and, if so, when.

I understand that an interim Report has been presented to the First Lord of the Admiralty. A further meeting of the Committee is contemplated to consider some outstanding questions. I am not in a position to go into details in connection with this matter, but I may remind my hon. friend, as I said in the House on 28th February, that this inquiry was not to be considered as one by a Commission or Committee in the strictest sense of the word. There was no specific reference, and I could not pledge myself to there being any formal Report.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consider the advisability of appointing a Minister of Commerce, with an adequate and capable staff, having similar duties to those belonging to ministers of commerce in various competing countries.