I object.

May I point out that this is purely a verbal alteration which it is proposed to make. We only propose to omit the words "City and."

I want to have a guarantee from the Secretary to the Treasury that mixed trains shall not be run on this line to the detriment of the public service.

The hon. Member would not be entitled to raise that question on the Lords' Amendment.

At any rate, I think it would be safer to put the Bill down for to-morrow.

Having regard to the extreme urgency of this matter, will it be possible for the Committee to meet to-morrow morning?

Yes, Sir, it is proposed to meet to-morrow.

Will its action be confined to the Stepney site?

The reference is perfectly general. While I have no power to pledge the Committee in any way, I shall endeavour to confine the deliberations of the Committee to the question of site as raised by the Stepney Borough Council.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, as stated by the Administrator of Rhodesia at the opening of the Legislative Council at Salisbury, His Majesty's Government have given their sanction to the attempt now being made to obtain labour from Arabia; at what date such sanction was given, and by what stipulations on the part of the Government the sanction has been accompanied.

The authorities at Aden were asked on the 29th of June to afford proper facilities for engaging Arab labourers for Southern Rhodesia. His Majesty's Government have stipulated that the Administration of Southern Rhodesia shall accept responsibility for the engagement of the labourers and their transport to Southern Rhodesia, and shall secure the enactment of legislation for their protection which shall satisfy the requirements of His Majesty's Government.

Will these labourers be obtained within the Aden district or from Southern Arabia in Turkish Territory?

We have no authority whatever over the population outside the British protectorate.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, as stated at the general meeting of the Buluwayo Chamber of Mines, an official of the British South Africa Company has been at Aden with a view to obtaining Arab labour at that place, and whether the Indian Government have made any of the stipulations with regard to the labour traffic from Aden such as they are in the habit of making with regard to labour traffic from India; whether Mr. Hole has already engaged 1,000 labourers under the sanction of the Imperial authorities.

The law governing emigration at Aden is the same as the law in India, but does not apply to Arabs from the interior, who are not British subjects. In the present case, therefore, I have satisfied myself that the Administration of Southern Rhodesia will introduce suitable legislation for the protection of Arab labourers, and I have authorised the Aden authorities to give such facilities to the company's official as may be proper. They will also see that the labourers fully understand the terms of their engagements, and are under no compulsion to accept them. I have not heard what number of labourers Mr. Hole has engaged. I am aware of the risks to which any experiment of this kind is liable, and the Aden authorities will watch it carefully.

Have the Government of India any representative in Rhodesia who will communicate with them, or will the Colonial Office represent them?

The Indian Government has no representative in Rhodesia, but I believe it is well known that these Arabs will not work unless they are well treated; and, therefore, you have in that fact a guarantee for their good treatment which does not exist where weaker races are concerned.

May I ask the noble Lord whether the legislation in South Rhodesia of which he spoke will be enacted before these men arrive or after?

The understanding is that the legislation shall be in force by the time they arrive.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the introduction into Rhodesia of persons of colour as immigrants for the purpose of labour are protected by provisions similar to those contained in the Trinidad Ordinance laid upon the Table of this House relating to "Immigrants introduced at private expense" (Acts 37–57) which permit such introductions only on order by the Governor and making the contract of service dependent on the approval of protector and proof that the parties entered in the contract voluntarily and with full knowledge of its meaning; and also whether such immigrants have the protection secured to them equivalent to those provided in the same Ordinance in respect to labour and wages (Part VIII.); and whether he will lay upon the Table the Regulations in force in Rhodesia relating to labour, whether of natives or of immigrants.

Up to the present time there has been practically no introduction of coloured labour from over-sea, but with a view to providing for such introduction an Ordinance has been passed within the last month by the Southern Rhodesia Legislative Council. I understand that this Ordinance makes provision for the appointment of a Protector of Immigrants, and for securing in other ways the proper treatment of immigrants, but the actual text has not yet reached me. The labour of natives and immigrants in Southern Rhodesia has hitherto been regulated by the Cape law of master and servant, and I understand that an Ordinance codifying that law has been passed by the Legislative Council at their recent session. A copy will be laid on the Table when it is received.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will consider the advisability of making provision that on the return of refugee owners of house property to Johannesburg they should not be liable for payments in respect of rent, rates, and consumption of water for the period of time during which, in their absence, their houses have been occupied by the Boers.

The position of refugee owners of house property in Johannesburg has been under the consideration of His Majesty's Government, and it is possible that further legislation may be necessary. I am, however, advised that lessees of houses who were driven out when the war broke out would under the Roman Dutch Common Law, and also under a proclamation issued at the beginning of the war by the late President, be exempted from the Payment of rent for the whole of the period during which they were deprived of the beneficial occupation of the property leased. Proclamations have been issued to facilitate the recovery of furniture, etc., which has been removed, and for the trial of actions for recovery of money paid for water rates. The question of rates is one on which I have not full information, and I will make further inquiry.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the proposed expenditure of £500,000 on land settlement in South Africa will proceed on the lines laid down in the Report of the Land Settlement Commission; if so, is it proposed to buy land and aid by Government funds men of small capital and little or no experience of farming to settle as farmers in South Africa.

As I have already indicated, I am not prepared to make any further statement on the subject at present, but Lord Milner will report fully on the matter as soon as possible after his arrival.

Will the scheme come before the House before any money is expended?

No, Sir. A Vote has been taken.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will lay upon the Table a copy of the instructions forwarded by the Government to Lord Kitchener for communication to General Kruitzinger.

The instructions to Lord Kitchener were contained in a telegram which ran as follows—

"Acts of the nature referred to in your telegrams of the 1st August which Kruitzinger threatened, and which have been committed as stated therein, are contrary to the usages of civilised warfare. All persons therefore authorising or committing them should, if captured, immediately be brought to trial, and the penalty of death should be inflicted on them if they are found guilty. This decision may be communicated by General French to the Boer leaders."

May I ask whether we can have the message from General Kruitzinger which brought forth this instruction?

The only message we have is the one received from Lord Kitchener and published in Lord Kitchener's telegram, in which he gave the facts of the case.

What I mean is the message from Kruitzinger himself.

I will consider that.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is intended in the future conduct of the campaign to discriminate between large and small bodies of the enemy, and whether the latter are to be denied belligerent rights.

The future conduct of the campaign must be left to Lord Kitchener, who will no doubt be guided by whether the enemy act as belligerents or contrary to the usages of war, irrespective of the numbers that may be fighting against us at any one time or place.

Will the noble Lord, consistently with the statement he has just made, withdraw the telegram of instructions which has just been sent, controlling Lord Kitchener's action in this matter?

No, Sir; because I hold that what Kruitzinger threatened was contrary to the usages of war.

Is it understood, then, that in this matter Lord Kitchener is acting under the direct orders of His Majesty's Government from home?

No, Sir; Lord Kitchener in his telegram mentions the whole facts of the case, and he would naturally rely to some extent on the advice he got from home, but he certainly would act entirely on his own initiative.

Has a date yet been fixed for Lord Kitchener's return?

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether General Dixon's despatch, giving an account of the battle of Vlakfontein, has yet been received; if so, whether he will lay it upon the Table, together with the full details which he is to communicate to the House in reference to that battle; whether he will also communicate to the House the sworn evidence as to killing of British wounded, promised in Lord Kitchener's despatch; and whether any reply has been received from General Delarey to the communication which Lord Kitchener addressed to him in reference to the alleged killing of British wounded at Vlakfontein.

Yes, Sir. The despatch will be laid immediately. In answer to the second paragraph, we have not yet received the sworn evidence. The answer to the third paragraph is "No."

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a man named Coetzee was, on the 24th of June last, tried at Dordrecht by a Military Court, composed of a Lieutenant-Colonel of the Royal Irish Regiment and a Colonial Major and Lieutenant, on a charge of murder and high treason; that the evidence disclosed that a Boer picket had been surprised by Colonel Scobell's column on the 6th of June, and that two men, of whom the prisoner was one, were found with rifles and ammunition in a neighbouring donga, from which the witness thought shots were being fired; and that on this evidence against Coetzee, and the evidence of another witness, he was certain the prisoners were the sons of a British subject, Coetzee was convicted and executed; and whether, in view of the feeling among our Dutch fellow-subjects caused by military executions of this kind, he will direct that captured Boer soldiers who are alleged to be British subjects shall be reserved for trial by the ordinary courts.

I have no information concerning the first part of the question. In reply to the second part, it is impracticable to try men taken in arms against us by ordinary courts.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he has obtained information from South Africa, and if he can communicate to the House what were the exceptional circumstances connected with the compulsion of British colonists to witness the execution of their countrymen at Dordrecht; who gave the order for such compulsion; if it was sanctioned by the Commander-in-Chief in South Africa, and, if not, whether the officer responsible for it has been punished; and whether these colonists were convicted criminals or prisoners; under what penalty did they attend, and what object was gained by such compulsion.

The report has not yet arrived.

Will the report arrive before the end of the session?

It is quite impossible for me to say when it will arrive.

On what date did you wire for the information?

I cannot say.

rose to put a further question—

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

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has any official information to the effect that several of the leading inhabitants of Cradock have been deported for refusing to obey the order to attend the execution of Johannes Petrus Coetzee; and, if so, by whose order was the deportation carried out.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his attention has been called to the fact that all male adults in the township of Cradock were summoned by a public notice, headed by the title Martial Law, by Major C. C. Wiseman Clarke, Commandant Cradock District, to attend in the market square on the morning of Friday, 12th July, at a quarter to eleven, to witness the promulgation of the sentence of death on Johannes Petrus Coetzee for high treason, and that the notice enjoined all places of business to be closed from half-past ten till after the promulgation of the sentence, and whether this notice had the sanction, either previous or subsequent, of Lord Kitchener.

In reply to these questions, I have no information on this subject.

Will the noble Lord ascertain if there is any truth in this serious allegation that a number of men have been deported for refusing to witness an execution?

I understand we are to have a full report, and until that arrives it is impossible for me to say anything.

Is it not the fact that after the Dordrecht case orders were given that people should not be compelled to witness these executions?

Order, order! That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

Will the report be received before the prorogation of Parliament?

It is barbarous!

Has the noble Lord any doubt that the proclamation was issued at Cradock? I have a copy of it here. It is a most atrocious thing, and yet the War Office have no information.

May I ask whether, pending the information being given to this House, this black practice will continue in South Africa?

Order, order! Such a question would not be put on the Paper.

Well, will the practice go on?

Would I be in order in handing a copy of the proclamation to the noble Lord?

The hon. Member can do that privately.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the military authorities have found it necessary to clear Waterkloof of its inhabitants, and whether over forty families have been sent to safe farms; can he state what is meant by "safe farms"; whether they are prison camps, and how far they are from Waterkloof. I do not wish to be out of order, but I notice that portion of my question as to whether Waterkloof is in Cape Colony has been cut out.

It is not usual to admit questions asking for information which could be obtained from any map. The matter, however, is not important, and I dare say had it been submitted to me I should have left it in the question.

I hope the clerks at the Table will note that.

I have no official information to enable me to reply to the question.

When is the noble Lord likely to have the information, if indeed he ever gets any at all?

It's a case "where ignorance is bliss—"

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Sergeant Major Burney, Prince of Wales's Light Horse, who claims that he was one of the men who tried to rescue Captain Robert at Colenso, and who states that he is owed £145 by the War Office, for which he has made repeated applications, but has not yet received a penny; and what action it is proposed to take in the matter.

My attention has been drawn to this man's case, and I caused inquiries to be made by cable as to the truth of his statements. I have received the following reply—

"Burney enlisted Durban 30th January, 1901; was acting squadron sergeant-major, and reduced to ranks by district court-martial 1st March; was in hospital some time, and discharged the service 17th May; was arrested by civil power 18th May, and fined for drunkenness five shillings or five days; no pay due to him; he left power of attorney at Standard Bank of South Africa; officer commanding Prince of Wales's Light Horse knows nothing about him, as he never joined the corps in the field; no trace of his name in any Natal irregular corps; he has made no application for passage out of South Africa, consequently, as far as military is concerned, he is still in South Africa."

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that, though Roman Catholic chaplains have distinguished themselves during the war in South Africa by their conduct in attending to the sick and wounded on the field of battle, no mention of this fact is made in the despatches from the seat of war, and if he can state the reason of this omission.

One Roman Catholic chaplain has already been mentioned and rewarded, and further names have been received since the publication of the last honours and are under consideration.

What was the nature of the reward given?

I cannot say without notice, but probably it was promotion from one grade to another. I cannot say definitely, however.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office if, having regard to the continuance of the war in South Africa, and the possibility of more mounted Volunteers being required, the Secretary of State will allow the mounted infantry companies formed by certain Volunteer corps at the instance of the military authorities to remain until the expiration of their present engagement in 1904 upon the regulations as to capitation grant and allowances promulgated last September, bearing in mind that these companies do not compete with the new Imperial Yeomanry, being drawn for the most part from a different class.

Will my hon. friend kindly refer to my reply to a question put on this subject by my hon. friend the Member for Kilmarnock Burghs on Tuesday last.†

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can announce the date on which the Fife and Forfar Yeomanry, who recently returned from South Africa, will receive the pay due to them and their formal discharges; and whether he can state what length of furlough will be given to the men who have served for over a year in South Africa; and whether he will consider the advisability of paying the men up to the day when they are actually discharged and able to resume civil employment.

The men of this company were discharged seven days after arrival, having been granted the usual seven days furlough after disembarkation. They have been paid in accordance with general instructions an interim payment of four-fifths of the sum apparently due to them. They will receive all pay due to them as soon as ever the pay sheets are rendered.

As the Financial Secretary to the War Office appears to throw responsibility for the payment or non-payment of the Imperial Yeomen on the officers commanding companies, may I ask him whether it is not almost impossible for officers to pay finally their men in this country until the pay sheets which are necessarily with the unit in South Africa, have been passed by the paymaster there?

† See preceding Volume, page 1408.

My hon. friend is perfectly correct. The Yeomanry who have come back are time-expired men, and the unit to which they belong is still out in South Africa. The pay sheets, therefore, contain the names not only of the men still out there, but of all the men who have come home, and until the pay sheets are properly checked in South Africa and sent back it is impossible for the officers commanding companies properly to render the pay sheets. We are expediting matters in every way possible, and meanwhile we a re trying to alleviate matters by giving the men four-fifths of what is held to be due to them.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the contract for beer, stout, and Irish whisky to supply the troops in the Curragh district has been given to the Burton Brewery Company; and, if so, can he say what opportunity has been given Irish firms to compete, and for what term the present contract has been taken.

I am not aware that the contract has been so placed, but the matter is entirely one for the general officer commanding the district.

Will the noble Lord inquire?

No, Sir.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he will cause inquiries to be made as to whether Kaffirs in South Africa have been armed by the British to such an extent that there is scarcely a camp in South Africa where a few natives with well-filled bandoliers may not be seen, and whether he will inquire whether most of the British columns are now accompanied by armed native scouts.

No, Sir. I have no official information to this effect. It would be contrary to all orders issued on the subject if natives were armed for offensive purposes. At the same time I will communicate with Lord Kitchener on the subject.

Will the noble Lord also communicate the answer to the Colonial Secretary?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will state the number of coloured men employed in and about the British Army in the war in South Africa.

I have no information to enable me to give the numbers. No such record could possibly be kept.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can explain why the outfit allowance for an officer of the Reserve recalled to service is the same as that for an officer promoted from the ranks in the infantry, but £50 less in the case of the cavalry, although a cavalry outfit is more expensive than an infantry one.

I do not think I can add anything to my reply to a question put by my hon. and gallant friend on this subject on the 2nd instant.†

I beg to ask the Secretary for State for War if he can explain why officers joining a regiment or corps on exchange or from half-pay are allowed to retain their Army seniority, whereas officers recalled from the Reserve are deprived of theirs.

A Reserve officer has no rank until he is recalled to duty. A regimental officer takes rank in his

† See preceding volume, page 1033.

regiment or corps from the date of appointment to it. If his Army rank bears a different date to his regimental rank, he carries his Army rank date, for purposes of precedence and command, only when serving together with officers of other corps.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can say why officers of the Reserve who have received a gratuity are granted full pay on recall to service, while officers in receipt of retired pay only get £150 a year.

After careful consideration it was decided that there should be no deductions from the full pay of those officers who had received a gratuity, as they represented that the money had been treated as capital, not income, and had not necessarily been invested in the purchase of an annuity.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can say when he anticipates the inquiry which is being held at the War Office as to the purchase of horses in Austro-Hungary will be concluded; and whether he will promise that the whole of the evidence will be published for the information of members of Parliament.

The inquiry is now concluded, but the Report and the evidence are not yet ready for submission to the Secretary of State for War. As some of the evidence was given on an honourable understanding that it should not be published, the Secretary of State for War cannot promise that the evidence will be published. He will doubtless publish the Report.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether a decision has been arrived at with regard to conceding to the labourers employed by the War Department at the naval ports the same advance as that recently given to those under the Admiralty.

The question is at present under consideration. I will notify the hon. Member when a decision is arrived at.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in cases where a conviction by court-martial is submitted for confirmation to the Judge Advocate of the Fleet, the prisoner is required to undergo any part of the punishment awarded before the validity of the conviction has been adjudged by that legal officer; and whether he can state in any, and, if so, how many cases last year prisoners have undergone the whole or part of a sentence before the conviction on which it was based was quashed or reversed.

Although all contested courts-martial are referred to the Judge Advocate, sentences awarded by naval courts-martial under the terms of the Naval Discipline Act come into operation at once. They are scrutinised by the local Commander-in-Chief, who would suspend the sentence in the event of any apparent illegality, pending reference to the Admiralty. It might happen that a sentence, subsequently found to have a legal flaw, had begun to take effect, but such instances are very rare. One only has occurred during the last twelve months, and in that case the imprisonment awarded had not been commenced when the finding was quashed.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the rate of wages paid to joiners by private shipbuilding firms who receive contracts from the Admiralty are from 5s. to 10s. above the rate paid by the Admiralty to joiners in Government employ; whether he is aware that joiners have to undergo a long apprenticeship and to purchase an expensive kit of tools; and whether, under these circumstances, he will undertake that the rate of wages paid to joiners in Government employ shall be inquired into with a view to placing it on an increased and more fair standard.

Inquiries were recently made as to the rates of wages paid to joiners in private employment and joiners in the dockyards respectively, and it was ascertained that, taking into consideration the rates per hour, the rates of the latter compared favourably with those of the former. The rates of pay prevailing at the time of the inquiry referred to are substantially the same as those paid at the present day. All joiners, whether in the employment of the Government or not, must undergo a long apprenticeship, and must purchase tools for the prosecution of their trade. Under these circumstances it is not considered necessary to inquire further into the rates of pay of joiners in Government employment.

I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether, seeing that the distribution of a contract by a principal contractor amongst other independent employers is a sub-contract, the Government requires to be informed of the conditions under which the work so distributed is done.

The Government cannot as a rule be informed of the conditions governing preparatory work which is not done on Admiralty premises. As I informed the hon. Member on Tuesday last, the terms of the Fair Wages Resolution of the House of Commons are embodied in all Admiralty contracts.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any decision has been come to by the Admiralty as to the publication of the evidence given before the Departmental Committee on Naval Victualling, and whether, in view of the fact that many witnesses testified to a system of bribery prevailing in connection with canteen catering and contracting, any steps are being taken to free the Navy of such practices.

It is not proposed to publish the evidence given before the Departmental Committee on Naval Victualling. The question with respect to the management of canteens, to which the hon. Member refers, and with respect to which evidence was given before the Committee, is receiving careful consideration at the Admiralty.

Is it not the fact that several witnesses made allegations of bribery in connection with this matter?

Yes, I believe some of the witnesses did suggest it.

Then, under the circumstances, ought not the evidence to be published?

No, Sir. It is not usual to publish the evidence given on departmental inquiries. We had reason to believe that some of the witnesses would not come forward if they had anticipated that their testimony would be made public.

Are the Admiralty entitled to receive evidence of this nature?

The Admiralty take the course which is most conducive to obtaining the truth. I should like it to be clearly understood, however, that no allegation of bribery is made against the Admiralty, or against any of its officers or officials in the performance of their duty.

I shall take the earliest opportunity of calling the attention of the House to this matter.

Can the hon. Member say in what branch of the service bribery does not take place?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any appointments of chief and warrant officers to positions in the Naval Ordnance Corps have yet been made in accordance with the undertaking repeatedly given that such appointments as opportunity offered should be secured to them.

The report of the Committee which recently considered the organisation of the Naval Ordnance Store Department made recommendations with respect to the employment of chief and warrant officers. These recommendations, together with others made by the Committee, are now under the consideration of the Admiralty, but no actual decision has yet been arrived at.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the results of shooting from ship's guns on board H.M.S. "Terrible," demonstrating that, where special attention is given by officers and men to gun, training and practice, the efficiency of a ship can be increased by at least 30 per cent., the Admiralty intend that Captain Scott's method of training men to shoot shall be adopted on every ship in His Majesty's Fleet.

The Admiralty is fully alive to the necessity of training men to shoot, and all possible means are being employed to obtain the highest degree of efficiency. Captain Scott's method of training is being followed, and a large number of sets of his aiming apparatus have been ordered, in addition to those already supplied to ships in commission.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state approximately the amount of income tax collected in India from incomes between Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000; and whether he has considered the advisability of raising the limit of income liable to income tax to Rs. 1,000 as soon as the finances of India permit.

The amount of income tax collected in India from incomes between Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000 is approximately 36 lacs out of a total of 193 lacs. As at present advised I am not disposed to raise the existing exemptions. Any changes in this or any other form of taxation must be governed by the future condition of Indian finance.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can fix the date for the introduction of the Indian Budget, and whether the Report of the Famine Commission will be printed and distributed previously to the discussion of the Budget.

The Budget will be taken on the day fixed for the Committee stage of the Appropriation Bill. The Report of the Famine Commission has, within the last few days, been received officially from India, together with the comments of the Indian Government and a statement of the action which they propose to take upon it. I cannot undertake to present these Papers to Parliament until I have had time to consider them in council, and as the questions raised are complex and most important, I shall not be able to come to a conclusion upon them for some little time.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if his attention has been called to the deterioration of the staple of Indian cotton and to the condition in which it is brought to market, and if the Government can do more than is now being done to bring about an improvement in this particular by methods similar to those which have been so successful in Egypt.

I stated in answer to a question in this House on the 1st July† that I was aware that the poor quality and condition of Indian cotton had been the subject of a good deal of attention in India, and that efforts

† See Debates, Fourth Series, Vol. xcvi., page 419.

were being made by the Indian Agricultural Departments to obtain selected seed, and to induce the cultivators to grow improved varieties. I am in communication with the Government of India on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that the officer commanding the 11th Hussars, with six other officers and one private of the 11th Hussars and other regiments of the British garrison at Cairo, while foxhunting at five o'clock on Sunday morning, the 21st July, in a walled-in garden, in the absence of the owner and without his leave, were assaulted and beaten with sticks by the owner's servants and the native guards in charge of the place; whether the officers were authorised by the general in command of the Cairo garrison to prosecute these servants for obeying their orders and defending the property; whether he is aware that, while the officers have apologised to the owner, the servants and guards have been sentenced to long terms of imprisonment for obeying their orders, and whether the Government propose to use their influence with the Egyptian Government to obtain remission of these sentences; and whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the correspondence connected with this case.

To ask the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the case in which certain servants in the employ of Mr. W. S. Blunt, upon his enclosed stud farm near Cairo, have recently been condemned to terms of imprisonment of six, four, and three months each for defending their employer's property from invasion and damage by certain officers in His Majesty's service; whether, in order to prevent the prejudice of native opinion against the administration of justice in Egypt, His Majesty's Government will take steps to secure these men's release.

As this is a Foreign Office matter, perhaps I may be allowed to answer the question. The information which we have received is to the following effect:—The officer commanding the 11th Hussars and others were out fox-hunting on the 21st July. A fox was found on the outskirts of Mr. Blunt's property, and was followed by the pack into an enclosure. The Master and whips galloped to a hole in the wall in order to get to the hounds and prevent any damage being done, when Mr. Blunt's stud manager shouted to them to stop, and struck at them with his stick. The other officers remained outside, but, hearing shouting inside, went back and entered the enclosure. Two of the officers who had first entered were surrounded by a number of the men of the place, mobbed, struck, their hats knocked off, and their horses beaten. The officer in command did his best to restore order, and called on the officers to fall back, and ordered them not to strike their assailants. The assailants were prosecuted for assault in the ordinary courts of law before the native courts, and the stud manager was sentenced to six months' imprisonment and two other defendants to four and three months respectively. It is understood that the defendants will appeal. The officers have expressed their regret to Mr. Blunt for the trespass, but it appears that practically no damage has been done to his property. There seems no reason to doubt that a serious assault has been committed, which no orders from the owner can justify; but the general officer commanding the British troops in Egypt will be requested to prevent the occurrence of incidents of this nature. The decision of any question as to the remission of sentences is for the Court of Appeal and the Egyptian authorities. Correspondence will be laid as soon as complete reports have been received.

May I further ask the noble Lord whether the officers were in mufti; whether the servants who drove them out were unable to speak a word of English; whether the men had been employed by the owner of the property for the special purpose of keeping out marauders; whether, under these circumstances, the Government will use their influence with the Egyptian authorities to have the sentence revised; whether in Major Rycroft's official report to headquarters in Cairo he does not say—

"We drew along the edge of the desert, and about 5 a.m., right outside the wall enclosing Mr. Blunt's property, the hounds jumped over the wall and immediately gob on the line of a fox";

and whether that is not inconsistent with the account which the noble Lord has given.

Is the noble Lord not aware that Major Rycroft possesses a perfect knowledge of the Arabic language, and owing to this and the great forbearance of himself and his officers prevented a serious occurrence?

As the hon. Member for Waterford is aware, it is not my decision that supplementary questions should not be answered, but the decision of the House. However, in deference to the position which the hon. Member occupies in the House, I do not object to say one word in answer to him. The officers were in mufti, and it is true that Major Rycroft has a thorough knowledge of Arabic, so it was not necessary that the natives should know English. But I do not think the hon. Member quoted my answer quite correctly. I said the fox was found in the outskirts of Mr. Blunt's property. With regard to the line the British Government should take, we shall, of course, await a full report of the circumstances before we go into the matter.

May I ask whether, pending an appeal, the men, if in prison, will be released?

I must have notice of that question.

Do the military regulations allow officers of the British Army to go fox-hunting and poaching on Sunday?

Order, order! Such a question is obviously out of order, and it has nothing to do with the question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any information has reached the foreign Office of a proposed modification in the Customs tariff of Persia; if so, whether due notice will be given to British merchants previous to the introduction of a radical change, and whether he would state the nature of the scheme.

The answer to the first question of my hon. friend is in the affirmative. The question of whether any notice is required or is practicable will receive consideration. I am not yet in a position to make any further statement on the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state if any provision is made, or whether any reserve would be immediately available, if, owing to the reduction of interest or other causes, the withdrawals from the Post Office Savings Bank should exceed the new deposits.

The hon. Member asks me what would be done in the event of the falling off of Savings Bank deposits, which for a long time have been continually increasing. I see no reason to anticipate any such difficulty as he suggests.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can now state the reference to, and the composition of, the Commission on Coal.

No, Sir; I am not yet able to do this.

When is the right hon. Gentleman likely to be in a position to give the information?

Not in the course of the present session.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state approximately the sum accrued in the hands of the Customs at the end of July in respect of coal duty to be returned under the remission agreed to during the passage of the Finance Bill through the House of Commons; and, in view of the inconvenience and loss caused to exporters by the withdrawal of this capital from their business, will he expedite its repayment.

I am afraid I have not sufficient data available to enable me to give the figures asked for. Every effort is being made to expedite the settlement of the numerous questions arising out of the contracts submitted, and directly each settlement is made steps are taken with a view to the return of the duty which has been remitted.

Will the amount be less than a quarter of a million?

I cannot say.

Will interest be paid on it?

I think not.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has yet received a reply as to whether William Morrison, fireman on the steamship "Numidian," was arrested on 23rd May, in Montreal, for being absent without leave, and as to whether the master left him in prison and sailed for Liverpool without paying him off, in accordance with Sections 187 and 188 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894; and, if so, can he state what steps, if any, he has taken to see that this man is paid and compensated for his loss of time; and will he get a report of the case from the superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office and magistrate's clerk at Montreal.

No, Sir. A communication on the subject was addressed to the shipping master at Montreal on the 24th July, but no reply has yet been received.

When shall I repeat the question?

As soon as I get a reply I will communicate with the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that British and Irish railways carry foreign goods at from one-half to two-thirds less than the charge for home goods, and that their charges for coal are throe times those of the German and Belgian railways; whether he will advise the appointment of a Departmental Committee during the recess to inquire into and report upon those matters in connection with transport.

No, Sir. I am not aware that the facts are as stated by the hon. Member, and I do not propose to institute such a general inquiry as that suggested by the question. If any specific instance of undue preference is brought to my notice, I will inquire into it.

I have forwarded several specific complaints to the right hon. Gentleman already.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, having regard to the changes in the law made in the Grand Committee upon the Factory and Workshop Act Amendment and Consolidation Bill, he will consider the advisability of separating the consolidating from the amending clauses, or in some way showing the new proposals in the old law.

A copy of the Consolidation Bill with notes to explain the Amendments, and also a Memorandum showing how each clause in the amending Bill was embodied in the consolidation Bill, were circulated to members of the Grand Committee; and copies of the Memorandum were deposited in the Vote Office for the use of members. I think this is all that can be done—it would be quite impossible to separate the clauses.

Is my right hon. friend aware that the new provisions reducing overtime are likely to seriously affect the wage-earning powers of workers in Sheffield?

With regard to that, I have received from a very large number of bodies representations against the proposals embodied in the Bill. It is not possible for me to state what course the Government propose to take until the Bill comes on.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the opinion of trade unionists of all classes overtime is most injurious to, and not required by, the working classes?

I do not know that I can quite go to that length, but still I have had representations from working men asking me to allow the matter to remain as it stands in the Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that we work overtime here?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether inmates of inebriate reformatories who become insane and are transferred to local asylums have their maintenance in such asylums paid for by the Government.

Their maintenance is paid for by the Government so long as they remain criminal lunatics; if, however, an inmate of an inebriate reformatory who is removed to an asylum does not within a short period after the removal show such signs of recovery of sanity as render it probable that he can properly be returned to reformatory treatment, he is usually discharged from the class of inebriates, and thereupon becomes and is treated as a pauper lunatic.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state who was the magistrate who signed the requisition asking that troops be sent to Bethesda, and, seeing that there has not been anything in the behaviour of the people at Bethesda during the past week to render necessary the presence of the soldiers, whether he intends to order their immediate recall.

I understand that the magistrate who signed the requisition was the Chairman of the Standing Joint Committee for Carnarvonshire. I am glad to be able to say that I am informed that the state of things at Bethesda is such as will, in the opinion of the local authorities, justify the withdrawal of the bulk of the troops on the 10th instant, but I must remind the hon. Member that the responsibility for the preservation of order in the district rests with the local authorities, with whom I have no power or intention of interfering.

Was the magistrate resident in the district? What is his name?

I am afraid I cannot give that. Probably the hon. Member knows it better than I do.

Have the local authorities held any inquiry?

The responsibility rests with them, and I am informed that they felt justified in taking this step.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that on the evening of Saturday, 3rd August, some of the soldiers now stationed at Bethesda for the maintenance of the peace created alarm among the inhabitants of the place by shouting and fighting in the public street opposite the Douglas Arms Hotel, and what action he proposes taking to punish the offenders.

I have no information to the effect suggested.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the cost of catering the troops sent to Bangor in anticipation of disturbances at Bethesda is an Imperial or a local charge, and by whom were the rates for catering agreed upon with the local tradesman.

The incidence of the cost in this and similar cases is under consideration.

Can the noble Lord state the exact proportition of the Imperial and the local charge?

The whole question is under consideration, and if I gave an answer now it might be misleading.

Will regard be had to the decision in the Aberdare case?

All the facts will be considered.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the sub-committee of the joint committee of the Carnarvonshire County Council, to whom the chief constable appealed for endorsement of his request that soldiers should be sent to Bethesda, are composed of persons connected with the slate trade; and whether he proposes doing anything to amend the law so as to prevent in future interested parties from acting as magistrates in the calling out of the military during a labour dispute.

I have no information on the point referred to in the first paragraph. I find no reason in the facts at present before me for thinking that any amendment of the law is required.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the Liverpool Corporation refuse to entertain a claim for compensation for damage caused on a farm at Huyton by the bursting of a water main belonging to them on the ground that they are protected by their statutory powers from any liability in a case of the kind; and whether he will undertake to introduce legislation to provide for the recovery of compensation for damage caused in cases of this kind.

I understand that the corporation consider that they are not liable in the case referred to in the question, unless it can be shown that they have been guilty of negligence in the construction or use of the waterworks. Without admitting their liability, however, they have offered as compensation a sum of £15, at which amount the damage has been estimated. I could not undertake to introduce legislation as suggested by my hon. and gallant friend.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will direct an inquiry into the circumstances attending the ptomaine poisoning of two ladies by decomposed cream; and whether he will take prompt steps to check the improper use of preservatives to enable articles of food to be disposed of to customers when in a state of decomposition dangerous to health.

I have seen a newspaper paragraph as to the inquest in the case mentioned in the question, and I will endeavour to obtain a report from the medical officer of health of the borough on the subject I expect to receive in a few days the Report of the Departmental Committee on Food Preservatives, and I hope then to be in a better position to judge how dangerous decomposition in food may be satisfactorily prevented.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will now lay upon the Table of the House the report made to his Board by the late Dr. Ballard, one of the inspectors of the Local Government Board, respecting the results of vaccination in the case of Emily Maud Child at Leeds, to which reference is made in the Report of the Royal Commission on Vaccination, in paragraph 4 (27) of that Report.

It would be contrary to the practice of the Local Government Board to give publicity to the reports made by their inspectors in cases such as that referred to by the hon. Member. These reports are always regarded as confidential. Full particulars of this case will be found in Appendix IX. to the Final Report of the Royal Commission on Vaccination, and in the evidence given before the Commission.

Was not the Report made to the Royal Commission on Vaccination?

No; I gather it was made to the Local Government Board.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the statement of Professor Virchow, agreeing with Dr. Koch, that human and cattle tuberculosis are different, the Government will grant a sufficient amount to enable exhaustive scientific experiments to determine upon the communicability of tuberculosis from animals to man, and also appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into and report upon the subject.

The making of experiments for the purpose referred to is a matter to be considered in connection with the question of the appointment of a Royal Commission. This question is receiving the attention of the Government, but, as I stated on Tuesday, they have not at present arrived at a decision with regard to it.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the proposed organisation of secondary education will include the efficient control and regulation of pupil teacher centres by the new education authority; and whether he will state by what authority school boards are permitted by the Board of Education to provide secondary education for pupil teachers employed in their own schools, and more particularly for pupil teachers employed in schools conducted by other bodies.

I cannot pledge the Government to the contents of the Education Bill of next year. I understand the sections of the Education Act of 1870 relied on by school boards are 19 and 35.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, seeing that the total annual expenditure on science and art amounts to about 360,000, he can state what proportion the science and art grants for agriculture bear to the whole grants.

There was paid for the year 1899–1900 in respect of attendances and results of the science examinations, under the heading "Principles of Agriculture," £407. But this does not at all represent the total grants for instruction bearing on agriculture, as it does not include grants for instruction in such subjects as botany, biology, and chemistry, nor the grants given on these and kindred subjects in evening schools and in day schools of science.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he can state what steps, if any, are being taken to re-open the Holywell schools; and whether it is the intention of the Department to grant the request of the ratepayers to be allowed to establish a school board for the management of said schools.

A school board for Holywell alone is about to be set up.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he can state when the first contract for the foundations of the Victoria and Albert Museum runs out, what amount of money will have been spent under this contract, and what amount remains unspent, and when will the foundations be completed; has any contract been concluded for the basement of the Museum; have any tenders been invited for the main building; and, if not, what is the cause of delay in their issue; are the plans complete; have any modifications or alterations been made in them to diminish the extent of the Museum; and have delays been caused through certain special materials being ordered in not sufficient time for the building, the foundation stone of which was laid by Her late Gracious Majesty Queen Victoria more than two years ago.

The foundations are completed, and the contract was for £33,410. A second contract has been made for building to the ground-floor level, and this work is now being proceeded with. As soon as this is finished tenders will at once be invited for the superstructure, the plans being now practically ready. No alterations that I am aware of have been made which would reduce the size of the museum, and no delays of importance have occurred, the work being completed within the allotted time. The contract for the foundations was not entered into until some time after the laying of the memorial stone, that ceremony having taken place in advance to suit Her late Majesty's arrangements.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he would consent to delay the widening of Piccadilly until the effect upon traffic of the proposed continuation of the Mall into Cockspur Street has been ascertained.

May I suggest that the work should be suspended until next year, that the House may have an opportunity for considering the proposal?

I will consider that, but I may point out that the scheme was before the House last year. I do not think the alternative suggested by my hon. friend would have any appreciable effect, seeing that no heavy traffic or omnibuses can use the route; but the point shall be considered.

Was not the scheme very generally condemned last year?

I am not aware of that, and I venture to think that the scheme can be defended, and that if the public knew exactly what is intended objections would be easily answered.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the scheme is generally condemned in Ireland?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he is aware that certain postmasters interpret Rule 3 (section b) in the Town Postmen's Rate Book to mean that a postman should wear his coat buttoned from neck to waist (however hot the weather may be); and whether, seeing that Mr. Arnold Morley, when Postmaster General, held that the top button only was intended to be fastened, this interpretation will be acted upon by the Postmasters throughout Great Britain and Ireland.