I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that a young man named Godefroy, son of the Rev. Mr. Godefroy, of Pretoria, was shot in the camp of Boer prisoners in St. Helena by a British sentry on the 19th February, 1901; will he state what cause was alleged by the sentry for shooting this prisoner, what was the nature of the inquiry held, and what was the result of the inquiry.

^* : The Governor of St. Helena informs me that Godefroy was shot in camp by a sentry on 9th February. A court of inquiry found that at the time Godefroy was stoning the sentry, who fired in self-defence.

Can the right hon. Gentleman enable me to see the full report of that inquiry? My information is of a totally different character.

^* : The reports of such inquiries are not usually published.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that this is not an ordinary court of inquiry, but an inquiry into a case where a civilian was shot?

^* : I will consider it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a claim of £300,000 has been preferred by the right honourable Cecil Rhodes, De Beers Diamond Mine Company, at Kimberley, in relation to expenses alleged to have been incurred by Mr. Rhodes and by the company for goods supplied and services rendered during the siege; and, if so, what answer, if any, has been accorded to this demand of Mr. Rhodes and of the De Beers Diamond Company.

^* : The sum of £300,000 was stated as the expense incurred, but I understand the amount really claimed is £54,641 4s. 9d. The accounts are being examined, but no payment has yet been sanctioned.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in the month of January last, the Militia authorities in Johannesburg refused to allow to be cashed a draft for £300 which had been received by the local committee for the relief of the women and children in the prison camp at Johannesburg, and the committee were consequently obliged to return this draft and another for a similar amount to Cape Town, unused at a time when the urgent need for relief existed, and whether every facility is now afforded for committees, irrespective of nationality or politics, to convey relief in money or goods to women and children detained in prison camps in South Africa.

^* : I am not aware of the matters alleged in the first paragraph. Every facility is afforded to committees to convey relief to the refugee camps under the superintendence of the Burgher Camps Committee. The facilities afforded and the assistance rendered have been acknowledged by the Netherlands Benevolent Society.

What is the Burgher Camps Committee?

^* : It is, as I have explained more than once, a committee formed locally in order to facilitate the distribution of comforts and other gifts sent.

What is the nature of this committee? Who are they? Who constitute them?

^* : I cannot give the hon. Member details; but I have already informed the House that Lord Kitchener has said that these committees have been formed locally and are now working.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the population of Johannesburg and its immediate neighbourhood is now estimated at 30,000, whereas before the outbreak of hostilities the population of Johannesburg alone was 150,000; and will he state what steps, if any, have been taken to restore the 120,000 people driven out of Johannesburg by the war to their work and their homes.

I do not know whether the figures given by the hon. Member are correct or not, but I am aware that the number of refugees from Johannesburg is very large, and the question of their return has received, and will continue to receive, most careful consideration. It is governed by the exigencies of the military situation, but a certain number have already been allowed to return, and every effort is being made to accelerate the movement.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state why the version of the letter addressed by Lord Roberts to General Botha as published in the recent Blue-book suppresses several passages; and can he state whether in this letter Lord Roberts proposed to deport Mrs. Kruger, Mrs. Botha, and the wives and families of the fighting Boers from Pretoria.

Yes, Sir, Lord Roberts, under military necessity, did contemplate the exercise of his undoubted right to transfer the care and maintenance of the families of the enemy to their natural protectors. He abandoned his intention, as after correspondence he feared the women and children must inevitably suffer greater hardships and privations. As regards the first part of the hon. Member's question, perhaps he will kindly be good enough to refer to the title-page of the Blue-book, which publishes correspondence as far as it affects the destruction of property, and there would be no public advantage in publishing any further communications.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these passages appeared in a leading Dutch organ, and that they have been deliberately suppressed in the Blue-book?

Does the right hon. Gentleman recollect that only on Tuesday last he denied to me that there was any correspondence with reference to the deportation—

Order, order! The question on the Paper has been answered.

^* : I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether His Majesty's Government will consider the advisability of taking any action to secure from the Transvaal Gold Mining Companies† a larger payment towards revenue and war purposes than the 5 per cent. additional tax on their profits, yielding £250,000 per annum, in view of the recommendation by Sir David Barbour to cancel the dynamite monopoly, which has hitherto yielded £600,000 yearly.

No, Sir. I do not think the hon. Member does understand the question yet. I do not know of any single company, either the Transvaal Gold Mining Company or any other, upon which a tax of 5 per cent.

† In the Question appearing on the Notice Paper the word "Company" was used.

would produce a sum of £250,000 per annum. Although it is the fact that the Boer Government did propose to impose a tax of 5 per cent, upon profits, that tax was not levied; and, accordingly, the 10 per cent. which Sir David Barbour recommends would be a tax levied for the first time. I have also to point out that, though Sir David Barbour made recommendations with regard to the dynamite monopoly, I have already informed the hon. Member that His Majesty's Government have not come to any conclusion on the subject, and therefore his question is one of pure hypothesis. On the whole, I have to say that the recommendations made in Sir David Barbour's Report are, as has already been stated, under the consideration of His Majesty's Government, and I am not prepared to make any further statement at present.

^* : May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not state that His Majesty's Government agreed to the general principle laid down in the Report?

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the Report of the Lands Settlement (South Africa) Commission, and in regard to the statement on the part of the Commissioners to the effect that it is to be feared that the expenditure of blood and money on the war will be wasted unless strenuous efforts be made to establish in the country at the close of the war a British population large enough to make division and disorder impossible, he will state to what extent His Majesty's Government propose to adopt the recommendations of the Commission.

I am not in a position to make such a statement for the reason given in my reply to a question by the hon. Member for the Rushcliffe Division of Nottingham on Thursday last.†

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if any Return can be prepared which will show the rate of mortality that prevailed among the women and children imprisoned by the Boers at Ladysmith, Kimberley, and Mafeking during their invasion of Natal and Cape Colony, more especially in reference of the high death rate from enteric caused by dead horses and other putrescent matter having been thrown into the river above Ladysmith; whether any Return can be prepared of the dietary of the women and children whilst imprisoned by the Boers, and whether the Boer commanders ever took any steps to ascertain if the children they had imprisoned were provided with a proper adequate daily supply of milk, or as to the adequacy of the dietary in general of the women; and will he order that the Returns, if granted, shall specify in each case whether the women and children in question were prisoners or at liberty to leave.

As regards Ladysmith, the civil population numbered about 8,000. They were not permitted by the Boer general to leave the town or the neutral camp at Intombi after the commencement of the siege. Our Returns do not give the numbers of sick or of deaths among the civil population. The proportion, however, of sickness among the troops, due to a considerable extent to causes similar to those which affected the civil population, was very heavy, and our Returns show that at one time it equalled about one-fifth of the available strength. Considerable suffering was occasioned among the civilians by the cutting of the water main, leaving as the only source of supply the Klip River, which was exceedingly foul from the causes mentioned by the hon. Member. The women and children were given the following rations during the siege. For adults: Preserved meat ½ lb., or fresh meat, either beef or horse flesh, ¾lb.; biscuit ½ lb., or 1 lb. bread, subsequently reduced when siege was prolonged. Children were given half rates. The milk supply was quite inadequate and was not even sufficient for those who were under treatment in the military and civil hospitals suffering from diseases which required a milk diet. It was impossible, therefore, to provide any supply for those in health, either women or children. The civil population of Kimberley numbered over 40,000. The deaths during the siege were 1,694. At Mafeking the white civil population numbered about 700. In seven months there were 36 deaths among them, or about 5 per cent. Of the native population we have not precise information as to deaths or sickness; nine women, however, are reported as having been killed by the Boers and two wounded in an attempt to leave the town on the 15th April, 1900.

In how many cases were the houses of these women and children burnt down by the Boers?

^* : I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Committee of Experts to consider the future organisation of the Army Medical Service will take into consideration the arrangements to be made in time of peace for utilising in time of war the services of civil surgeons and trained civilian nurses in connection with the Army Medical Service; and will he state what will be the reference to the Committee.

The Committee will be invited to consider the general medical requirements of the Army. The Committee is a consultative Committee, and I do not propose to publish, the terms of reference.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Committee on the Army Medical Department will take evidence, and whether it will be allowed to suggest alternative schemes to that proposed by the chairman; and whether its proceedings will be public.

No, Sir. So far as at present arranged the Committee will not take evidence, and its proceedings will be private. It will, of course, be open to any member of the Committee to submit alternative proposals.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the intentions of the Government with reference to the disembodiment of the 3rd Battalion Gordon Highlanders, now serving at Aldershot.

Orders for the disembodiment of this battalion have already been issued. The disembodiment will take place on the 6th instant.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the fact that the Runnymede rifle range, near Staines, has been offered for sale to the War Office, and that the offer has been refused; and, seeing that this range is likely to be sold for other purposes and to cease to be available any longer for shooting, whether he will take the matter into reconsideration with the view of still securing this ground as a rifle range.

The purchase of the Runnymede range was refused, as it is not required for use by Regular troops or Militia.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any punishment can be inflicted upon a recruit who on attestation gives a wrong answer as to age; and, if no punishment can be legally inflicted in such a case, whether he will take steps to provide adequate punishment.

I must refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 2nd April to the hon. Member for the North Division of Aberdeen, in reply to a similar question.† For the reasons given in that reply, effective results from any legislation on this point could not be expected.

I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether the Government will consider the advisability of appointing either a Departmental Committee or a Committee similar to the one which, inquired into the reorganisation of the War Office, both to satisfy the country that the Department is in a position to stand the strain of prolonged naval operations, and, if necessity be shown, to prepare a scheme for placing that Department in a fit and proper condition to undertake the supervision of a possible naval war against one or more European Powers.

No reason is seen for an inquiry of the nature mentioned by the hon. Member, and it is not proposed to appoint a Committee for such a purpose.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will take into consideration the proposal that much greater facilities at reduced charges should be given to officers and selected men in the Army, as a reward, to enable them to come to England for three months leave at intervals during their career in India; whether this could be arranged by affording them facilities on vessels returning or on specially chartered vessels; and whether, with the view of improving by such an arrangement the health and consequent efficiency of the army in India and increasing its popularity, he will cause an experiment to be made to carry out this proposal.

I should be glad if the facilities for taking leave could be increased with due regard to the requirements of the service and without imposing any undue charge on Indian revenues. But the question which the hon. member has raised is a large one, and could only be considered in consultation not only with, the Government of India, but also with the War Office, as it is closely connected with the grant of leave to soldiers serving abroad in other parts of the Empire. I will not lose sight of the question.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any further information as to the position at present held or claimed by Russia in Manchuria.

^* : I can add nothing to the statement I made on the 6th May on this subject. †

Is the noble Lord aware that a Yellow-book has been laid in the French Chamber giving information to 18th June on this and other Chinese questions?

[No answer was returned.]

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that Sir Claude MacDonald, His Majesty's Minister in Japan, has travelled to this country via the United States, and by North German Lloyd steamship across the Atlantic; whether Sir Claude MacDonald's expenses upon this journey will be paid by the Foreign Office from public funds; if he will give instructions that official journeys from Japan shall in future be by the fast Empress Line of British steamships across the Pacific, by the Canadian Pacific Railway across Canada, and by a British steamship across the Atlantic; and if he will cause instructions to be issued by the Foreign Office that all official journeys outwards and homewards shall, when equal facilities are available, be made upon British vessels.

Sir Claude MacDonald's travelling expenses on this occasion will be defrayed from public funds. In such cases as this the con-

† See Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. xciii., page 748.

venience of British officials concerned is the principal consideration, and the route chosen by Sir Claude MacDonald was the quickest available. It is not proposed to issue any instructions on the subject.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the commander of H.M.S. "Basilisk" has been asked to investigate into the treatment of the Welsh colonists in Patagonia by the Government of the Argentine Republic, and, if his report is in agreement with that of the chaplain of H.M.S. "Flora," what action His Majesty's Government propose to take.

^* : The commander of His Majesty's ship "Basilisk" was not instructed to make any special investigation into the position of the Welsh colonists in Patagonia, but visited the settlement in pursuance of standing orders that the senior naval officer on the South-east coast of America shall arrange for periodical visits to the district. The reports of Commander Dodgson and of the chaplain of His Majesty's ship "Flora" agree in stating that some of the colonists are anxious to leave, and if possible to settle in a British colony. The Foreign Office and Colonial Office are considering whether action can be taken in furtherance of this wish.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the development of interest in the colonies of the Empire in Imperial affairs, he will inquire into and consider, with special reference to the colonies, the desirability of representing to His Majesty and His Majesty's Government the advantage to the British Empire of His Majesty's style and title being so expressed as to more clearly recognise Royal and Imperial Sovereignty over the entire British Empire.

I have been in communication with the colonies, and I hope that Papers on the subject will shortly be laid, and a Bill introduced.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has assented to an ordinance of the Gold Coast Colony which provides for the deportation and imprisonment of forty-six persons—kings, queens, chiefs and others—of Ashanti; and whether he will lay upon the Table Papers relating to the matter, showing the reasons for the ordinance and the specific charges made against each of the persons who are to be deported.

The Papers asked for will be included in Papers which I hope to lay very shortly.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the income tax on dividends for the half-year ending on 30th June last has been deducted sometimes at 1s. 1d. and sometimes at 1s. 2d. in the pound, and whether he will state what is the proper rate for the tax to be deducted for the half-year in question.

It is impossible for me to say what would be the proper rate of deduction in any particular case without knowing the facts, but the Inland Revenue issued a circular in April, immediately after the Budget, which affords clear directions on the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can now state how much of the amount of £100,000, remitted off the duty on coal of a value at the time of shipment not exceeding 6s. per ton, will go to the relief of the consumer abroad, and how much to the producer and exporter in this country.

^* : This is entirely a matter of opinion. I think that last year it would have been a relief to the consumer abroad, but as I was convinced by the arguments put before me that in a bad year it might have fallen, at any rate to some extent, on the producer, I agreed to the exemption.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the broad principle on which he proposes to exempt the duty on coal shipped before the 31st December next by merchants under free Budget purchase contracts of a speculative nature, that is contracts entered into with the producer but not covered by sales, whereas similar coal shipped during the same period by merchants under speculative sale contracts, that is contracts not covered by purchases, will be charged the full duty.

I have never proposed, and I do not think I have never been asked for, an exemption in favour of contracts for the purchase of coal from the producer here not covered by sales to a purchaser abroad. The whole question of exemption from duty relates to the latter. If a man has bought coal here merely with the intention of selling it to a purchaser abroad, he can either add the duty to the price of the coal to such purchaser or sell his coal in some other way. In either case it is a speculation.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, seeing he has only a limited authority over the Commissioner of Police for the City of London, and as that official also is independent of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, he will grant an inquiry into the present mode of working of this system and the general results which accrue from this present arrangement.

^* : I am afraid that, in the numerous answers I have given to my hon. and gallant friend on this subject, I have failed to make myself understood. I have repeatedly stated that the Commissioner acts subject to the control of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, and while I am perfectly prepared to make an inquiry where a case is made out, I know of no case which is made out for such an inquiry as that suggested.

May I ask my right hon. friend if I am to take it that he is satisfied with the present division of responsibility?

^* : I have no reason to be dissatisfied either with the control or the administration of the police in the City of London.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the recent burglaries in the neighbourhood of Brixton, the house of the vicar of Brixton having been broken into for the second time on last Thursday, and a post office broken into on Saturday; whether he can give the number of burglaries within the last quarter and the number of cases in which culprits have been made amenable; and, seeing that dissatisfaction prevails in the district at the failure of the police to cope with the evil, whether he will see that in future adequate precautions are taken to prevent a recurrence of these burglaries.

^* : I have not by me the figures for which the hon. Member asks, but I have no reason to suppose that the precautions at present taken by the police for the protection of property in the district referred to are inadequate.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, seeing that Section 126 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, states that a seaman shall not be entitled to the rating of A.B. unless he has served four years before the mast, he can say by whose authority superintendents of mercantile marine offices were given permission to enter men on articles of agreement who could not prove four years sea service, and the letters N.P. put opposite the names of such men.

The Board of Trade are ad- vised that, notwithstanding the provisions of the section to which the hon. Member refers, superintendents of mercantile marine have no power to refuse to allow seamen to be entered as A.B.'s in articles of agreement when they are presented as such by the owners or masters of ships, with whom, in fact, the responsibility of rating rests. Superintendents are acting in the matter under instructions issued to them by the Board of Trade.

May I ask if it is not within the power of the Board of Trade to appoint superintendents who can say whether a seaman is a seaman or not?

I do not think it would be in the power of the Board of Trade to do that.

May I ask whether this will be one of the matters to be inquired into by the Committee of which the right hon. Gentleman spoke?

I am not in a position to make any statement as to that.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether any instructions have been issued to surveyors of ships fixing the number of able seamen to be carried on sailing vessels and steamers; and if he is in a position to state how many able seamen would the rule provide for the "Primrose Hill," which was recently lost off the Welsh coast.

In reply to the first paragraph of the hon. Member's question, I would refer him to the reply I gave to a similar inquiry put to me by the hon. Member for East Clare on the 21st May. † With regard to the second paragraph, no scale has been issued by the Board of Trade laying down the number of A.B.'s that should be carried in such a case. I am, however, advised that the scale of manning recom-

† See Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. xciv., page 773.

mended in the Report of the Manning Committee was complied with both as regards the number of "effectives" and the proportion of individual effectives.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state whether electric tramways are inspected by an officer of the Board of Trade before being opened for the conveyance of the public; and will he say whether accidents on such tramways are made a subject of a Board of Trade inquiry.

The reply to the first portion of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. Wherever the circumstances seem to require it, accidents occurring on electric tramways are made the subject of an inquiry by an officer of the Board of Trade.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether it has been decided not to hold any more Civil Service examinations in Inverness; and, if so, will he state the grounds upon which the decision has been arrived at; also whether, in view of the importance of this question to persons in the north of Scotland, instructions will be given to continue the examinations in Inverness for a further period of two years, so as to give the experiment a longer trial.

Yes, Sir. The number of candidates at the thirteen examinations held at Inverness between the beginning of 1895 and last May was only thirty-nine, and the Civil Service Commissioners do not think that this result justifies the continuance of the experiment.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that there is no complete index of the Radnorshire and Breconshire wills lodged at the Herefordshire registry; and whether, for the public convenience, the Commissioners of Inland Revenue will take steps to have such an index made.

I am aware that there is no complete index of the Radnorshire and Breconshire wills at the Hereford registry, but the same may be said of other registries, and I am informed that the cost of having such an index made in all cases would be "enormous." I am not prepared to recommend a grant for the purpose.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been called to the fact that the total value of the work done by the Post Office for Government was for the year ending 31st March, 1900, of the value of £70,746 11s. 6½d., of which £34,064 1s. 8½d. was for telegrams, and that there is a corresponding sum for work done for railway companies by the Department in excess of telegrams which for the same period amount to £59,676; and can he state what is the total money value of all services rendered by the Department to railway companies free of charge.

The sum of £70,000 mentioned in the hon. Member's question represents only the value of work performed by the telegraph department of the Post Office. Against this must be set the value of the work done by other Departments of Government for the telegraph service, amounting to nearly £90,000. I cannot say what is the total money value of all services rendered by the Post Office to railway companies free of charge; but it must be remembered that these services are part of the consideration paid to the companies for the acquisition of their telegraph rights by the Post Office, and that the Post Office gets a further quid pro quo in the shape of wayleave or other facilities.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he can say what explanation there is for the fact that during the year ending 31st March, 1900, the number of telegrams sent for Government, amounting to 454,195, represent, as per the Postmaster General's Report, a money value of £34,064 1s. 8½d., whereas 1,443,766 telegrams sent free for railway companies only represent £59,676.

The explanation is that the Government telegrams were longer than the railway telegrams.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he will state what amount was expended in the year 1899-1900 by the Science and Art Department in grants to schools and classes in Wales and Monmouthshire, and whether he can state what amount was expended by school boards in Wales and Monmouthshire during the same period out of the rates for purposes declared by the recent decision to be illegal.

The Science and Art grants to schools and classes in Wales and Monmouthshire amounted in 1899-1900 to £9,541 2s. 9d., of which £3,756 3s. 1d. was in respect of grants to schools carried on in school-board buildings. The Board of Education have no means of estimating the amount paid by school boards for illegal purposes out of the rates. The amount in day schools would be very small; in evening schools it would probably constitute a larger proportion of their total expenditure in Wales.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he can say when the Order in Council containing the regulations for the registration of teachers will be laid upon the Table.

I am very much afraid that the Order in Council will not be ready to be laid for some time. The Report of the Consultative Committee is now before the Board of Education, and it will have to be very carefully considered. There are financial considerations involved which may require further communications between the Board and the Committee.

^* : I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he can state when the Annual Reports of Proceedings under the Diseases of Animals Acts and the Markets and Fairs (Weighing of Cattle) Acts, for the year 1900, will be presented to Parliament.

It is hoped that the report in question will be ready for circulation in about a fortnight.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether Sir Colin Scott Moncrieff, who represented the British Government at the recent Hydrographical Conference at Christiania, put forward a proposal in regard to the extension of the three-mile limit; and, if not, will he give the reason, and will he say whether any correspondence on this subject has passed between the British Government and the signatories to the North Sea Convention within the last two years.

^* : Sir Colin Scott Moncrieff did not bring forward any proposal at the Christiania Conference in regard to the extension of the three-mile limit, nor was he instructed to do so. The object of the Conference was to devise an international programme of scientific research with a view of discovering the causes of the diminution of the supply of fish in the North Sea. It was outside their terms of reference to make any proposal that did not rest on a scientific basis, or have a scientific object. I am not a ware that there has been any recent correspondence on this subject between His Majesty's Government and the signatories to the North Sea Convention, excepting that the question of reserving certain areas in excess of the three-mile limit has been discussed with the Danish Government.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether he is aware that in the Highland Crofting Counties a large proportion of the ratepayers who have the right to vote at parliamentary, county council, and parish council elections have no vote for the school board by reason of their rentals being under £4; and, seeing that in these circumstances these people have no voice in the selection of persons employed to teach their children, will he consider the expediency of introducing legislation such as will give school teachers in the crofting counties the right of appeal to the Scotch Education Department when under notice of dismissal by the school board.

^* : We are not prepared to propose, legislation with the view of establishing any special conditions with respect to a right of appeal against dismissal in the case of teachers in the crofting counties.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Monaghan, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the amount of the Exchequer Contribution towards the erection of labourers' cottages, respectively, at the close of last year, to the unions of Carrickmacross and Castleblaney.

The amount remitted to the county council on behalf of the Carrickmacross District Council was £102, and on behalf of the Castleblaney, No. 1, District Council, £188. Further sums of £176 6s. 1d. and £324 19s. 1d. were paid to the Board of Works in repayment of loans to these district councils respectively.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to an inquest held, last week at Castlebar Lunatic Asylum at which a Roman Catholic juror, named Michael Moran, refused to be sworn on a Protestant Bible, and demanded to be sworn on a Roman Catholic Bible which was lying on the table; is he aware that the coroner ordered the police to remove Mr. Moran; and will he state what authority he had for doing so.

It is true that the one juror named objected to be sworn on a Protestant Bible. The coroner, who is also a Roman Catholic, having a sufficient number of jurors, also all Roman Catholics, dispensed with Mr. Moran's attendance and gave an order that he should leave the court. He complied with the order. The coroner apparently acted on the authority vested in him by virtue of his office.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that in future the coroner has instructions to swear Catholic jurors on a Catholic Bible?

I believe I have no power over coroners.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the issue of a circular from the Education Office in Dublin, signed by the two secretaries, which they state they neither saw nor signed; whether any information in connection with the issue of this circular has come to the notice of any responsible official; if so, can he state when; whether the matter has been reported by any official to the Board; whether the delinquent has been ascertained; and whether any and what action has been taken by the Board.

The circular alluded to is one of two documents, drawn up to explain the manner in which the quarterly applications for grants to convent schools were to be prepared by the communities, and the amounts to be provisionally claimed pending final arrangements under the new rules. One of the documents related to schools receiving the full quarter's grant on the new system, and the other was used where payment was to be made partly on the new and partly on the old system. The original, which was a single document, was issued in June, 1900, under the authority of the resident Commissioner, and of the senior secretary who was then in office. On the occasion of the second issue, three months later, practically the same document was sent out with the same object, but in two parts, to suit the two distinct classes of case. For this course there was full official authority. There were two subsequent quarterly issues of the same papers—one in December, 1900, and one in March, 1901, when the necessity for any further use of the form came to an end.

But I submit that the right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question as to whether the circular bore the names of officials who deny that they either signed or authorised it.

I have read an account of what took place.

Will inquiry be made to find out if these allegations are well founded?

I have made careful inquiry, and the answer I have given is a fair and full statement of what occurred. If necessary, on the Estimates I shall be prepared to go into the matter at greater length.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can give the date on which the Dromore, county Down, Urban Council made the Order to have the premises reported as unhealthy put in proper sanitary condition, and state what steps were taken to ensure the carrying out of the Order; is he aware that in Meeting Street there are over a dozen houses without a single closet, either earth or water, and that the medical officer of health repeatedly sent in reports as to the unsanitary condition of several houses to no avail, as the council did not enforce compliance with his recommendations; and, seeing that the inhabitants are dissatisfied with the council for not enforcing the sanitary laws, will he direct the Local Government Board to send an inspector to inquire and report on the condition of the town.

The Order was made on the 4th March, and prosecutions have been ordered by the district council against persons for not complying with it. The present medical officer has not reported on the condition of the houses in Meeting Street; the owners have undertaken to provide the sanitary accommodation to the absence of which the hon. Member just referred. The Local Government Board has not received any complaint of default by the sanitary authority, and does not, therefore, feel called upon to interfere in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that two bills were received by the Mountmellick District Council on the 22nd instant from the arbitrator, one for £20 in connection with five cottages, and a second for £15 for three cottages in another scheme, and whether a resolution was passed at the meeting to the effect that the council considered the charges too high and protested against its payment; and if he will state upon what authority those claims were based, and whether the Local Government Board will request this arbitrator to abate his demand.

The Local Government Board is in communication with the district council in respect of the particular items, included in the amounts mentioned, to which exception is taken. The account will be carefully investigated by the Board, and if it be shown to be exorbitant, the Board will take steps to reduce it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that discontent exists among urban councils in Ireland as to the present method of making, collecting, and accounting of rates in Ireland; whether, in order to obviate the difficulties created by the present system, he would be prepared to recommend that all urban rates be made on the same day, entered up in one rate book, and included in all sets of demand notes; whether he would dispense with Form 2, under the Urban Rate-Collectors' Order; and whether he would provide for a consolidation of rates for separate charges.

My attention has been drawn to the difficulties mentioned, and I am considering whether they can be removed.

When may we expect a decision?

I can give no date. I am doing all I can to forward the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that difficulty is experienced by urban councils in complying with the annual demands of the county council as at present made; that, in consequence of the quarterly payments to be made, the urban council, by reason of publication of notices making, assessing, and collecting rates, loses at least five weeks before it can commence to get the first quarterly payment collected; and whether, in order to prevent legal proceedings and costs against urban districts, half-yearly instead of quarterly payments might be made.

The difficulty referred to is experienced in some towns, but as a rule it is due to the delay of the urban councils in making their rate. If the estimates and other preliminary work in connection with the making of the rate are dealt with at a sufficiently early date before the commencement of the financial year, the collection could be started in time to enable funds to be raised to meet the demands of the county council. The Board considers that quarterly payments would be more convenient for the county councils, and for the unions and districts which have to be supplied by them with funds. It is necessary that provision should be made for the early payment by urban district councils of amounts demanded by county councils, as these latter bodies have to supply funds to the unions for the relief of the destitute poor, a proportion of which is payable by the urban area.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the remarks made by the magistrate of the Southern Division police court, Dublin, on a circular issued by the shop assistants of Dublin calling on the public to perform their shopping (drapery) before 7 p.m., and on the owners of drapery establishments to close their premises at this hour on all evenings except Saturdays; and whether he will state by what authority this magistrate has taken the action mentioned in this matter.

In the course of a trial for assault on a shopkeeper the magistrate commented on this circular, which had been issued by the Shop Assistants' Association. The language of the circular seemed to imply that, peaceful means having failed to induce the shopkeeper to close his shop, some other means should be adopted. The magistrate decided this case, of a shop assistant who had assaulted a shopkeeper, not on the circular, but on the facts. His reference to the terms of the circular was in the nature of proper comment on a document calculated to give rise to similar excesses.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state particulars as to the number of passengers who came on to and left the boats of the Shannon Development Company at Kilgarvan Quay, Dromineer, Rossmare, and Williamstown; whether his attention has been called to a series of complaints, and will he take any steps to remedy the alleged grievance.

The hon. Member has communicated to me, in writing, a number of inquiries bearing on this and other matters connected with the Shannon steamer service, and I have forwarded to him to-day a detailed statement in reply. The Commissioners of Public Works, whom I have consulted, are not aware of the existence of any grievance such as alleged.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state what is the cause of the delay in the building of two labourers' cottages on the lands of Mrs. Fitzpatrick and John Twomey, who require agricultural labourers, which lands are situate in the Ballygrennan division of the Croom Union, in the county of Limerick; whether he is aware that applications for the same were made about two years ago by two labourers named John Treacy and William Hennessy, whose houses were condemned by the local sanitary authority, and at the Local Government Board inquiry, held on 25th July, 1900, at Croom, were favourably considered; that since that time nothing has been done towards the building of those cottages but the marking of the plots and sites; and whether, taking into consideration the unsanitary condition of the labourers' dwellings, he will take steps to see that the cottages are built without further delay.

The erection of the two cottages in question was recommended by the inspector. A Provisional Order confirming the improvement scheme was prepared in January last, and its issue only awaits the settlement of some matters to which the Board has repeatedly directed the attention of the district council. The Board will again communicate with the council on the subject.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Donegal County Council by resolution represented to the Local Government Board that the boundary of the Innishowen District Council should be altered so as to include within its area I those parts of the barony of Innishowen, county of Donegal, at present included in the Londonderry District Council No. 2, and seeing that a similar resolution was passed by the Innishowen District Council, can he state why a local inquiry was not instituted by the Local Government Board into these proposed changes, and if any steps have been taken by the Board to inquire into the advisability of these changes, in order to make this council's boundary, so far as the barony of Innishowen is concerned, identical with the county boundary.

Resolutions to the effect stated have been received by the Local Government Board, and the proposal is engaging its careful attention.

How long are we to wait? This matter has already been under the consideration of the Local Government Board for twelve months.

I am unable to fix a date.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that out of the £2,400 due to the County Borough of Cork under the Technical Instruction Act for the financial year ending the 31st March a balance of £2,100 still remains unpaid; and whether, as the committee cannot carry on the work of the school without this money, he will cause this balance to be forwarded immediately with interest for the time it has been withheld.

The following Question also appeared on the Paper:—

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieu- tenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the proceedings at the last meeting of the technical instruction committee of the county borough of Cork; whether he is aware that, owing to the grant from the Department due for the financial year ending 31st March being withheld from the committee, the Christian Brothers have had to borrow money at a high rate of interest to pay debt incurred on account of the promised grant to their technical schools and colleges; and can he state what is the cause of the long delay on the part of the Department.

The Cork Technical Instruction Committee received a payment on account in January last, and a further payment on account will be made immediately on the Report of the Department's inspectors who are at present in Cork. There will be no delay in putting the committee in funds for all the purposes of the approved scheme as soon as certain necessary preliminaries are complete to the satisfaction of the Department.

Is it not the fact that the scheme put forward by the committee was approved long since by the Department, and that the delay is causing causing considerable inconvenience and loss to the schools in Cork?

I have no doubt it is causing inconvenience, but I do not gather that it will cause any loss ultimately.

Let us hope not.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland is he aware that large sums of money have had to be expended in providing increased accommodation for patients in Monaghan District Lunatic Asylum during the past ten years, and that it is still congested; and, seeing that the Cavan County Council passed a resolution asking the Local Government Board to hold an inquiry with a view of converting one of the workhouses in that county into an auxiliary asylum for the harmless lunatics and to prevent a further outlay on buildings in Monaghan, will he state what steps, if any, the Local Government Board intend to take in this matter.

The Local Government Board will held an inquiry into this matter as soon as the engagements of its inspector will permit.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the salary paid to the principal teacher, Sallybank national school, for the year ended 31st March last, was £9 17s. less than his consolidated salary fixed on the average of the three previous years; and that he would have received more than he has got for the year mentioned if the old system of payment had continued in force; and in view of the assurance repeatedly given that no teacher would suffer pecuniarily by the change, and the Board's Circular, dated 30th June last year, that it was the original intention of the Commissioners to pay consolidated salaries to all teachers from the 1st April, 1900, will he explain why the intentions of the Commissioners have only been carried into effect in respect to a small proportion of the teachers.

I am informed that the facts are not correctly stated in the first paragraph. This teacher did not suffer pecuniarily by the change in the mode of payment. The Circular of 30th June, 1900, explains why the Commissioners did not carry into effect their original intention to pay consolidated salary to all teachers from 1st April, 1900.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, owing to an unfavourable report of the district inspector, on a ten months examination, held after an epidemic of measles which lasted four months, the principal teacher of Clontifleece national school was censured and fined £10; whether the united demand of the manager and the principal for an investigation into the conduct of the inspector during the examination has been refused by the Board; and, if so, on what grounds; and whether he will see that the fine of £10 is refunded to the teacher.

This teacher was admonished after the results examination of 1899, and warned that if he failed to effect improvement his salary might be reduced. The admonition was confirmed on appeal. After the examination of 1900 he was fined £10 for continued inefficiency. A demand for further investigation was not acceded to, as it did not appear to be based on adequate grounds. The Commissioners see no reason for refunding the fine.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case of Hugh McCabe, who was convicted in Limerick on Friday, 28th June, for using obscene language; whether he is aware that this is the same man who wrote to the papers a letter, since quoted in this House, complaining of the persecution to which he alleged he had been subjected because he professed the Protestant faith; and whether, seeing that McCabe at his trial denied that he had written the letter, he will order an inquiry to be made into this matter.

The reply to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. The suggestion in the second paragraph conflicts with the suggestion in the third. The fact that McCabe did not write the letter had already been reported by the police, who made a careful inquiry at the time into the statements which it contained. No further action in the matter is necessary.

As this man has denied that he ever read or wrote the letter, will the machinery of the law be brought into operation to have the writer found out and prosecuted for forgery?

I am afraid I cannot undertake to assist the editors of newspapers in such a matter. No further action in the matter is necessary.

Did the letter bear the Belfast postmark?

Will the right hon. Gentleman take some action in this matter, seeing that the letter was placarded as a piece of Popish tyranny?

^* : I have said that it is not proposed to take any further action.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that steam trawling continues in Wexford Bay, notwithstanding that repeated fines have been inflicted; and whether there is any possible way of increasing the fine pending the passage into law of the Fisheries (Ireland) Bill; and whether, in consequence of the very great damage done by steam trawling, he will make the Act retrospective.

I understand that illegal trawling is not being carried on in Wexford Bay, as alleged. The reply, to the second paragraph is in the negative.

In view of the serious damage being done, cannot the right hon. Gentleman take some such action as I have suggested?

I am afraid if I endeavoured to carry more than is already contained in the Bill before the House its chances of passing in the present session might be seriously prejudiced.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that on the bench of magistrates before whom Mr. Walsh, J.P., of Tallow, and those charged with him with conspiracy were brought, two justices were in favour of returning the case for trial, two against returning the case for trial; that the case was returned for trial, though the bench was equally divided; and that at the last assizes held in Water- ford, though forty-three jurors were told to stand aside by the Crown, no conviction was obtained; and, in view of the opinion expressed by the magistrates and by members of the jury that investigated this charge that a case had not been made out against the defendants, does the Crown still intend putting the defendants on trial on a changed venue, thereby increasing the cost of the defence.

The fact that this case is pending precludes me from stating more than this, that I do not admit the accuracy of some of the statements of fact contained in the question, and that accused will in a few days be put upon his trial for this offence for a second time.

Has this step been taken in order to secure the services of "Peter the Packer"?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the recent decision in the Irish courts that county councils are liable for accidents on roads whose maintenance or repair is in the hands of the county surveyors; and whether he will introduce any provision in the amending Order of the Procedure of Councils Order making the responsibility of the county council the same when the road is repaired by directions of a county surveyor as when it is in the hands of a contractor.

I am not aware of any decision on the point mentioned. No doubt there is an obiter dictum of Lord Justice Fitz-Gibbon to the effect mentioned, but it by no means follows, as the hon. Member seems to suppose, that because an ephemeral body like the grand jury was held not liable for damage for accidents occurring through the defective state of roads in charge of the county surveyor, that, therefore, the county council would not be liable under similar circumstances. The position of the grand jury in such matters was anomalous. There is no reason for altering the Order so as to relieve county councils from the ordinary liabilities of public bodies charged with the maintenance and repair of public works.

On what authority does the right hon. Gentleman give this decision? On that of the Lord Justice?

It is not a decision I refer to, but the obiter dictum of the Lord Justice.

Is the object to increase the liability on the rates?

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that an appeal has recently been lodged against a decision of the Local Government Beard auditor surcharging £12 on three members of Longford County Council for payments to rate collectors on rates collected after four months of the time allowed for collection had expired, can he hold out any hope that this portion of the county council's accounts order will be revoked, and, if not, can he indicate means of redress for members of county councils mulcted in such cases.

The Local Government Board, to whom the appeal was made, having been of opinion that the payment was made inadvertently, have, notwithstanding the technical legal liability of the councillors named, remitted the surcharge on equitable grounds. The order is a most useful one, and it is not considered desirable to revoke it.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the inconvenience caused to suitors in county courts in Ireland by reason of the latter part of Section 140 of the Civil Bill Act, 1851, having been repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1892, whereby it has been held of several county court judges in Ireland that civil bill decrees can no longer be renewed by the known agent or receiver of the plaintiff, but the affidavit required by the Act of 1851 must now be made by the plaintiff in person; and, as in oases where the plaintiff is a corporation or an incorporated company, this cannot be done and decrees after a year accordingly become null and void, steps will be taken by the Government to procure the re-enactment of the proviso so repealed.

I believe that some of the county court judges have made decisions to the effect mentioned, while others, I believe, take a different view of the law. None of these decisions have been reviewed in the superior courts. The County Courts (Ireland) Bill now before the House deals with the matter of decrees, and repeals the section of the Civil Bill Act of 1851 to which the hon. Member refers. The proper way in which to secure the change in the law desired by the hon. Member is to move an Amendment to this Bill in Committee.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that along the coast of Ireland wreckage of value is claimed by the Receiver of Wrecks, and the proceeds of which are debited to the Imperial Exchequer; whether, seeing that decomposed carcases of cattle washed ashore are not claimed and buried by the same authority, steps will be taken to alter the law so as to make receivers of wrecks responsible for the burial of carcases without expense to the local sanitary authorities.

I am aware that under statute the Crown is entitled to all unclaimed wreck found in any part of His Majesty's dominions. I am not prepared to introduce legislation for relieving local authorities from their liability under the Diseases of Animals Acts.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman give directions personally to the coastguard to attend to these matters?

I think that scarcely comes within my province.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the female supervisor in the Belfast post office who required two of the female staff to turn out their pockets and show the contents of their lockers, with the object of discovering if they had stolen a purse lost by her sister, was authorised by any rule of the postal service, or whether there is any authority by which a supervisor is constituted a criminal investigation agent with right, of searching employees without calling in the police and preferring a charge in the usual way; whether any charge was legally made before the two ladies were invited to show the contents of their lockers and of their pockets, and whether he will inquire if these two ladies turned out their pockets because they regarded the request as a command, and were afraid to refuse compliance; whether he proposes to punish, and, if so, how, the lady supervisor who accused them of theft, and treated them as stated, and whether he will cause a notice to be posted in all post offices that employees are not under any Obligation to turn out their pockets at the request of any supervisor.

There is no rule bearing on the subject, and the supervisor acted on her own responsibility. The Postmaster General understands from the written statements, of the telegraphists in question that they turned out their pockets voluntarily, and that they regarded the supervisor's announcement as a suggestion, or at most a request, and not a command. No one was accused of theft, and the supervisor could not therefore be punished on that score; and the Postmaster General considers it unnecessary to issue a notice on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he has made arrangements for increased postal facilities in the town of Navan.

Inquiry is being made as to the best means of providing a new and improved post office at Navan, and two sites for a Crown building are under consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that the townlands of Legland, Breen, Farragans, Stralongford, Lettermore, Midcut, Cloughroe, Lettershambo, Stroangibbah, Meeralaban, and the upper part of the townland of Drumkeen, in the parish of Convoy, Stranorlar, County Donegal, at present receive only a bi-weekly delivery of letters, whilst the adjoining townlands of Drumnacross, Callen, Callencor, Augheygault, Trintaboy, and the lower part of the townland of Drum-keen receive a six-day delivery; and whether, seeing that dissatisfaction exists amongst the inhabitants of the first named townlands as to the present arrangements for delivery of letters, steps will be taken to establish a six-day delivery also in said townlands.

The Postmaster General is aware that there is at present only a bi-weekly delivery of letters at the places referred to by the hon. Member. The question of affording a more frequent service has already been under consideration for some little time, and the Postmaster General has decided to provide a delivery every week at the places in question.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he can state what are the duties of the Treasury Remembrancer for Ireland.

He is the confidential adviser of the Treasury on all matters which they may refer to him. He is Deputy Paymaster General for Ireland, and as such is responsible for the accounts kept at the Pay Office in Ireland, and the payments made there-from. He is besides accounting officer for the County Court Officers, etc., Vote.

What are his office hours?

Obviously I could not answer that without notice.