I have to ask the leave of the House to read the following telegram I have just received from Lord Kitchener—

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can explain why no record appears in the Return of buildings burnt in South Africa of the farmhouses and other buildings burned during Sir Redvers Buller's march into the South Eastern Transvaal after the relief of Ladysmith.

No farms were burned down during this march of Sir Redvers Buller.

Arising out of the reply, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that in the summer of 1900 a number of letters from officers were published referring to farm burnings. [Cries of "Order!"] It is perfectly in order—

I do not think so. If the hon. Member wants further information he had better put the Question down.

I will furnish the right hon. Gentleman with the information and put down a further Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he gave authority for the arrest and detention of Miss Hobhouse on board the "Arundel Castle," on Sunday, the 27th October last; and, if not, when he first became aware of her arrest and detention; was it by his orders that she was detained on that vessel until the following Wednesday, and then forcibly deported to the "Roslin Castle," and carried a prisoner to England on that steamer. If these steps were not taken by his orders, when did he first become aware of them; and did he then signify his assent.

The action was taken by the military authorities in South Africa, and, as I have already stated to the House, I accept full responsibility in this House for such action.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received the Report of the Commission of Experts, appointed in August, 1900, to inquire into the causation, pathology, and modes of prevention (more particularly as affecting armies in the field) of dysentery and its connection, if any, with enteric fever; and, if not, if he will call for the Report, and lay it upon the Table of the House for the use of Members.

The Report is now complete but has not yet been printed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the number of cases of, and the number of deaths from, enteric fever during the months of December and January last.

The approximate figures for December are:—Admissions, 1,507; deaths, 224. The figures for January are not yet complete.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether lie will now cause inquiry to be made by telegram of Lord Kitchener I as to the circumstances attending the execution of Commander Scheepers.

Many statements similar to that which the hon. Member made in a Question put on Friday last appear without any justification whatever, and I must decline to answer any further Question put by the hon. Member on this subject until he furnishes me with his authority.

:I pledge my responsibility for the truth of these statements. Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry? If not, it is most disgraceful on the part of the Government.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Mr. Matthew du Plessis, the Cape Member of Parliament for Craddock, and Mr. Rademeyr, the Member for Humansdorp, both being British subjects, were upwards of six months ago compulsorily sent from their homes in the Colony to Port Alfred without any charge having been made against them, and that they are still detained there untried; how long is it intended to detain these gentlemen in exile; and what is the public exigency for such treatment of them.

No information has been received on these matters.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry?

I am afraid it would be impossible for me to do that.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that, in June last, Mrs. Rousseau, the wife of the Dutch clergyman at Pietermaritzburg, was deported from Graaff Reinet, in the Cape Colony, to Port Alfred, and that the same punishment was inflicted on Mrs. de Klerk; whether both ladies are British subjects; whether he can state upon what grounds they have been detained at Port Alfred ever since; and whether he will consider the advisability of allowing them to return to their homes.

I have no information on this matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman telegraph to find out?

I can add nothing to the answer I have given the hon. Gentleman.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether Mr. Marais has yet been brought to trial;.and, if so, upon what charge, and with what result.

Mr. Marais has not been brought to trial, but he has been ordered to reside at Port Alfred under surveillance. Lord Kitchener after carefully considering the evidence, held that, as some of the Dutch witnesses were unwilling to appear, sufficient evidence could not he produced to secure conviction.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state whether an inquiry has been held in South Africa with respect to the local purchase and supply of ordnance stores; whether this inquiry has revealed transactions of a fraudulent nature upon an extensive scale; whether inferior and even worthless equipment has been furnished at an extravagant price, to the inconvenience of the military authorities and to the detriment of the public interest; and whether, in view of the forthcoming debate upon Army contracts, he will immediately submit the Report of the Inquiry to the House.

The inquiry to which the hon. Member alludes was a private Departmental inquiry by four military officers, who, with the assistance of a financial Member, made a Report to the Commander-in-Chief on the purchases made by certain ordnance officers in South Africa. The Report by no means bore out the description given by the hon. Member. It has only recently been received, and no decision has yet been taken upon it. I can give no promise as to publication.

Are we to understand that the Army Vote 9, which is about to be taken today, involving an expenditure of nearly £3,000,000 in connection with South Africa, is to be—

Order, order! That is a rhetorical statement, not a Question.

Then are Members of this House to be debarred from asking information?

The hon. Member was not asking for information.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the reason for the delay in bringing to trial the action of the War Office v. Major Stoddert and others, instituted in Ireland, in reference to the alleged frauds of the defendants, as agents for the War Office, in the purchase of remounts for the War in South Africa.

Will the hon. Member kindly refer to my reply to a Question put on the 6th February by my right hon. friend the Member for the Sleaford Division of Lincolnshire?†

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he will state under what circumstances, and on what conditions, Messrs. R. Dickeson & Co. have secured the right to supply dry goods, and a number of other articles to canteens in the Dublin military district, what steps are taken to secure competition with this firm, for what period has their monopoly been created, and who is responsible for making the arrangement.

These matters rest with the General Officer Commanding the District, to whom the hon. and learned Member should address any communications he would like to make. I may inform the hon. Member that, in view of the early assembly of a Committee on the system under which canteens and regimental institutes will in the future be conducted, the Commander-in-Chief has directed that, contracts shall not be made for any period beyond next June.

Do I understand that in matters affecting the welfare of the soldier, Members of Parliament have no redress whatever in this House, but must communicate with the military authorities?

Questions as to refreshment contracts are always left in the hands of Commanding Officers, and I think the hon. and learned Member will recognise the difficulty of dealing with such matters from headquarters.

Then everything in connection with soldiers' requisites is a Government job, and we are not entitled to ask Ministers for an explanation!

Soldiers are best safeguarded by their own officers.

† See (4) Debates, cii., 517.

Then abolish this parliament.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that quantities of rolled oats of foreign manufacture are at present being supplied to the troops in South Africa, and that, when Scotch manufacturers of rolled oats asked to be allowed to offer for Scotch rolled oats, they were not permitted to tender, but were told that the Department only buys Scotch medium ground oatmeal; will he say why foreign oats are preferred by the Department to Scotch oats and will he see that in future Scotch millers are permitted to tender for Scotch rolled oats.

No foreign rolled oats have been bought by the War Department. Samples of Scotch rolled oats were obtained from several firms in June last for hospital use, but it was decided to supply Scotch oatmeal.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the articles bought under Vote 8, Item G, are bought by contract; and, if so, whether tenders are invited by publishing specifications, or whether officials make contracts privately.

The articles referred to are bought by contract. Tenders are invited and the contracts are placed on the resulting competitions in the usual way.

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can state the total sums which have been paid to the Cold Storage Company for supplying meat to the Army in South Africa during the three years ending 31st March, 1902.

The total amount paid to the Cold Storage Company from 1st April, 1899, to the 31st December, 1901, is about £4,773,000. No later figures are to hand.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can explain why the 30th Company Pembrokeshire Yeomanry are still in South Africa, although the period for which the members of that company signed expired at the end of February in this year; and whether he can state when they will be allowed to return.

These men were, like all other Imperial Yeomanry, enlisted for one year, or, if the war lasts longer, for the period of the war.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it was brought to his notice some months ago that certain electrical wiring and fitting work was being executed on board the battleships "Duncan"and "Cornwallis" by workmen not receiving the standard rate of wage recognised in the electrical trades; if so, can he state what, if any, investigation took place, and with what result; and whether he will now order an immediate inspection of the work already executed, before it is too late to ascertain what class of work has been put into these ships.

A statement to this effect, referred to by the hon. Member, was brought to the notice of the Admiralty. Investigation was made, and it was not found that the Thames Company had infringed the stipulations in their contract as to wages. The work on the "Duncan" and "Cornwallis" is being carried out under detailed specifications and tests. An overseer is stationed at the Thames Company's Yard to inspect the electrical work in progress, and the work has to be completed to his satisfaction. The inspection is, therefore, continuous. The work will be inspected as a whole and tested at a dockyard before being finally received. There is not the slightest reason to believe that the work is not of the best quality.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, seeing that judges of assize, as well as courts of summary jurisdiction, have only power to order an offender to be birched if he is under the age of sixteen, he will consider the question of amending the King's Regulations so as to restrict punishment by birching in the Navy to boys under sixteen years of age.

It is not considered desirable at present to make any change in the age as now prescribed in the King's Regulations.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state if any orders for armour plate have been given out by the Admiralty in respect of the battleships and armoured cruisers arranged to be laid down in the current financial year.

The only armour for which orders were given during the current financial year was that for the "Queen," "Prince of Wales," "Challenger," and some of the cruisers of the "Monmouth" class. No armour has yet been ordered for the battleships and armoured cruisers arranged to be laid down in the current financial year. Special steps, however, have been taken to issue the tenders for the armour required at the earliest possible date.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will grant the Return relating to the Imperial Service Force (East India), notice for which stands on to-day's Paper.†

I have no objection to granting the Return, with the exception of Section C.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if, with a view to ascertaining the earliest and precise approach of the south-west monsoon in India, he will take steps for the establishment of a meteorological station on the east end of Socotra, which, being 500 miles east of Aden and in the track of the monsoon current, would, through barometrical observations and sea temperatures, afford early indications of the monsoon.

So far as I am aware, no proposal for establishing a meteorological station on Socotra has ever been made by the Indian Meteorological Department, and any such scheme would be attended with very great difficulties and drawbacks, on account of the physical circumstances of the islands and the impossibility of transmitting information from it after the preliminary monsoon winds have set in.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will take into consideration the question of forming a Naval Reserve of the body of Lascars employed on British merchant vessels; and if he will invite the Government of the Viceroy of India to express their views on the advisability of creating such a Reserve.

There are such practical difficulties to the creation of such a Reserve under the orders of the Government of India, that I am not disposed to address the Government of India on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will cause to be printed a copy of the despatches mentioned in the last published Blue-book on affairs in Malta, but which were not printed in it; and whether he will also include the statements in writing sent to the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies by several Maltese gentlemen on the occasion of his recent visit to Malta.

I do not propose to publish any further Papers, at present. I am informed by Lord Onslow that it is incorrect that several Maltese gentlemen, other than officials, sent him any statements in writing while he was in Malta.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the existing conditions in relation to Wei-Hai-Wei, and the bearing of the agreement of April, 1901, on United States interests, His Majesty's Government will, in virtue of the option given in the last paragraph in Clause 3 of the Submarine Cable Contract (Chee-foo and Wei-Hai-Wei), determine the specified payment at present made to. the Company for transmitting all messages on the service of His Majesty's Government over this Government-owned line.

The right hon. Baronet appears to be under some misapprehension as to the effect of exercising the power reserved to His Majesty's. Government in Clause 3 of the Agreement referred to. This provision refers, only to the working of the cable by the. Company for the account of His, Majesty's Government, and does not affect the Company's rights under its agreement with the Chinese Telegraphs Administration and Government.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state when the present contract for reporting and printing Members' speeches in the House expires.

On 31st December next, or, if the House should be sitting on that date, at the end of the then current session.

Will the hon. Gentleman take into consideration, when the contract terms are re-considered, the recommendations of the Select Committee as to separating the reporting and printing contracts, and as to—

Order, order! The hon. Member had better put down that Question. It is clearly out of order now.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he can state how many cases of smallpox have occurred or been reported from the borough of Bethnal Green since the beginning of the year; and what proportion of persons so afflicted was found to be unvaccinated.

I am informed that 136 persons were reported to the Medical Officer of Health for the Borough of Bethnal Green during January and February last as suffering from small-pox, but thirteen of these were found not to be cases of that disease. The particulars as to vaccination are as follows:—Thirty-one were unvaccinated: of these twelve died. Four were vaccinated children under thirteen: of these none died. Seventy-six were persons above thirteen who were stated to have been vaccinated in infancy: of these seven died. The Medical Officer had no information as to vaccination as regards the remaining twelve cases.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he can state the number of children under three years of age remaining in metropolitan workhouses at the end of each of the past three years; and the number of children under three years of age who died in the metropolitan workhouses in each of the same years.

The number of children under three years of age in metropolitan workhouses at the end of last year was 651. The returns for the two previous years do not show the number at this age, but the number of children under two years of age in these institutions at the end of 1899 and 1900 was 501 and 512 respectively. I regret I am not able to give the information asked for in the last part of the Question.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education, having regard to the fact that grants of public money are now made to secondary schools where the pupils pay high fees, and which schools are carried on for profit in the shape of a dividend on the capital whether these grants are made to all other private schools on similar terms

Grants of public money are not made to schools conducted for private profit. But schools carried on by public companies in which the dividend is limited to 5 per cent. or less by Articles of Association, are not regarded as carried on for private profit.

So, if a private school is made into a limited company, it would then receive a public grant?

That would depend upon the amount of the dividend.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether he is aware that notice was given in December last to close six elementary schools in the Borough of Hyde, in Cheshire, on 31st March; that the deficiency in school accommodation in Hyde on the closing of these schools will be 1,800 places; that, while the managers offer to keep these schools open temporarily till the Board have had time to make good the deficiency, they do not desire them to remain open indefinitely; whether the schools will receive Government grants pro rata for the period during which they remain open after the close of their respective completed school years; whether the Board will sanction the payment of the Aid Grant by the Cheshire British Schools Association, while the schools are under notice to close; and what steps the Board is taking to make good the deficiency within a reasonable time.

It is true that six voluntary schools in Hyde have given notice that they will close on March 31st. The Board of Education are ready to enter into a reasonable agreement with the managers to keep these schools open while the prospective deficiency is supplied; but they cannot bind themselves in advance by such pledges as are asked for in the question. As soon as the amount of deficiency has been correctly ascertained, the Board of Education will issue a notice under Section 9 of the Elementary Education Act, 1870.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the deficiency is likely to be made up?

I cannot answer that Question.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for the Tonbridge Division, as representing the Charity Commissioners, whether he can state how many different sets of charity trustees manage the endowed charities of King's Lynn; what is the total value of the property and the total amount of the gross income managed by each set of trustees respectively; and whether any recent alterations have taken place either in the value of the endowments or the system of management.

From the information in the possession of the Commissioners there appear to be fifteen bodies of charity trustees administering the endowed charities of King's Lynn. Although in the case of several of the endowments I shall be glad to give the hon. Member privately details of the income, it is impossible to estimate the capital value of all the charities, or to give their aggregate income, in view of the fact, that in the case of the Municipal Charities, which are very numerous, the Commissioners have not received the accounts of the income and expenditure, notwithstanding frequent applications. In reply to the last Question, in the case of one of the Municipal Charities, building leases have recently been granted which will have the effect of increasing the value of the endowment, but otherwise there has been no change.

Can my hon. friend inform me to whom the frequent applications for the accounts have been made?

To the Clerk of the Municipal Trustees, Mr. Beloe.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that, in the year 1889, the then Attorney General for Ireland issued a volume of judgments of the Superior Courts in that Country in criminal cases, consisting mostly of decisions on Law points under the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1887, and that this book has been circulated by the Crown among Crown prosecutors, Crown solicitors, and resident magistrates, who habitually use it as an authority in Court; and, seeing that the book has never been put on sale, or any opportunity given to lawyers engaged for the defence of considering the cases reported in it, in order that the defendants' professional advisers may have an opportunity of seeing the decisions quoted against them, whether he will take steps to have this book put in circulation.

The volume in question has been supplied to the officials mentioned, and also to the Bar and Solicitors' Libraries. A limited number of copies of the volume were originally printed, and there are at present only about twenty of them available. These copies will, however, be placed on sale at Messrs. Hodges & Figgis Dublin, at a price to be fixed by the Stationery Office, and it is proposed to order a reprint of the work if the public demand appears to justify the expenditure involved.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the reprint is brought up to date?

It is only one year behind.

But that is very important.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he would state the number of appeal cases to the Chief Land Commission waiting hearing in County Fermanagh;why the Chief Commission omitted County Fermanagh on their last circuit through Ulster; and when they will next sit to hear appeals in Fermanagh.

The number of such appeals is 454. The sittings of the Land Commission are arranged with due regard to the claims of the several districts. No date has yet been fixed for the hearing of the appeals pending from Fermanagh, but I will endeavour to ascertain whether the Commissioners can assign a date approximately.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that complaints are constantly being made as to the manner in which the tolls and weighbridges in the town of Birr are managed; and if, having regard to the injury sustained by the public through the causes mentioned, he will take any steps to enable the District Council to become the owners of the tolls and weighing machines, so as to ensure that the weighing machines will be kept in proper order, and the tolls managed in a satisfactory way.

No complaints have been made to the Department of Agriculture on this matter. In reply to the second part of the Question, the Urban District Council of Birr is already authorised under Section 31 of the Local Government Act, 1898, to purchase the franchise, or right to hold a market or fair, whether under Statute, letters patent, or otherwise.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that under the will of Charles Shiels, dated 14th February, 1846, the Committee of Management of each set of his endowed houses throughout Ireland should consist of five local managers only, namely, the Protestant incumbent, the Roman Catholic clergyman of the parish, the Presbyterian minister, the nearest magistrate resident in the locality, and the parish churchwarden; can he explain why the wishes of the benefactor have been departed from, and why the local managers of the Dungannon branch of the charity consist now of thirteen members, of whom one only is a Roman Catholic; can he state how many of the thirty-three inmates in the Dungannon block of twenty-five houses, had resided in or within three miles from the town during at least five years preceding the date of admission; how many are paying annual or weekly stipends, and how many are imbecile, crippled, or blind; and also whether any residue of the charitable funds, and if so, how much, is distributed by the local managers, in accordance with the testator's directions, amongst persons of sober and industrious habits, residing in or near Dungannon, as may be destitute of means of support, or in need of a little assistance, to enable them to pursue their trade or calling with advantage.

I am informed that the facts are as stated in the first paragraph. The Governors of the Charity have, under their Trust Act of 1864, absolute discretion to alter or dispense with any of the directions in the testator's will, as to the management of the almshouses. None of the inmates at Dungannon contribute to their support, and the funds of the Charity are expended solely in connection with their support and maintenance. I have no information on the other matters mentioned.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether lie is aware that Sergeant Patrick Freyne, at present stationed in Loughglynn, County Roscommon, is a native of the district in which he is stationed; and whether this arrangement is in accordance with the practice of the Constabulary; whether his attention has been called to the fact that Sergeant Freyne is in the habit of calling at the houses of tenant farmers in his district advising them to pay their rents, and abusing them in violent language if they decline to accede to his request; whether such proceedings are part of the duty of a policeman; and whether he will cause Sergeant Freyne to be removed to some other district.

Sergeant Freyne is not a native of this district. He denies having acted in the manner alleged in the second paragraph. He may have advised those tenants with whom he was personally acquainted not to take part in an unlawful combination against the payment of rent, and pointed out to them the disastrous consequences which such a course of action might entail on them and their families. In so acting he would discharge the fundamental duty of a peace officer, namely, the prevention of crime and the protection of the subject. There is no intention to remove him from the district.

Is it not the fact that the sergeant was born in a neighbouring parish within two or three miles of the place where he performs his duties, and has he not innumerable relatives there?

That is not the information I have.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he explain why the Commissioners of Intermediate Education in Ireland have again given the contract for the printing of the papers set for the annual examinations under the Intermediate Education (Ireland) Act to a London firm; whether Irish printers have been afforded an opportunity of tendering for this work; and whether, having regard to the fact that all other Irish public educational bodies secure absolute secrecy in the execution of similar work in Ireland, he will represent to the Commissioners the advisability of having these papers printed in future within the four seas of Ireland.

This is not a matter calling for the intervention of the Government. If the Board of Intermediate Education determined that the examination papers should be printed outside Ireland, upon which point I have no information, I have no doubt they exercised their discretion wisely and well, and with the object, in the best interests of the pupils themselves, of preserving secrecy. The Government do not propose to communicate with the Board, as suggested at the end of the Question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know of any English Educational Authority that sends the printing of its examination papers to, Ireland?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his-attention has been called to the fact that the local rate (cess and poor rate combined) in the Omagh rural district in the standard year was 2s. 11d. in the pound, and that in the year now ending, 1901–02, it is 4s. 3¼d.; is he aware that the increase swallows up the agricultural grant, and leaves the ratepayer no better off than prior to the subvention, and that, in the case of the British farmer, half his rates are paid on agricultural land; and will he take into consideration this fact in dealing with the question of local taxation in Ireland, with a view to-placing the Irish farmer on an equal footing with the British farmer in respect to the Exchequer contribution in relief of rates on agricultural land.

The figures given in that Question are, I believe, accurate. The hon. Member is mistaken as to the operation of the English Act. To make the change suggested would alter the whole basis on which the Local Government (Ireland) Act has been passed. The remedy is economy in the administration of the rates.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state what steps, if any, are being taken to give effect to the provisions of the 40th Section of the Land Act of 1896 in the case of those estates in Ireland at present under the jurisdiction of the Landed Estates Court; and whether, seeing that on many of these estates situated in congested districts in the West of Ireland the tenants are suffering by reason of the delay in having this matter settled, he will say when it is contemplated to have sales effected and the land transferred to the tenants in accordance with the terms of the section quoted.

Since 1897, as a result of the pressure brought to bear by the Land Judge, a large number of estates administered in his Court have been wholly or partially sold, or taken out of Court, and the sales are rapidly progressing. In January last new rules were made regulating the procedure before the Land Judge. These rules, which were duly gazetted, are designed to afford further facilities for rapid sales to tenants. The 40th Section of the Act of 1896 does not apply to estates in congested districts until the Congested Districts Board have notified their intention not to purchase them.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on 24th February last a tenant on the Clanricarde estate was prosecuted for shooting a hare without a game licence and fined two pounds; and, seeing that the agent on the estate presided at petty sessions held at Woodford on the occasion, what steps, if any, will be taken in this matter.

The prosecution was at the suit of the Inland Revenue. The defendant was convicted and fined, as stated. He is the son of a tenant on the estate of the Marquess of Clanricarde. The agent of the estate was not disqualified from adjudicating in the case, and no action is called for by Government as suggested.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the feeling in the district is one of utter contempt for the law as administered?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the vacancy in the governorship of the Mayo Prison, caused by the transference of Mr. M'Gann to Armagh Prison, has yet been filled, arid if it is proposed to make the appointment from the ranks of those engaged in the prison service.

The reply to the first inquiry is in the affirmative, and to the second in the negative.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the grounds on which the Governor of Kilkenny Gaol has withheld from Michael Glennon, a bail prisoner at present confined there, copies of the Irish People newspaper, sent him by his friends, whilst allowing him to read other Irish newspapers; whether in this matter the Governor acted on his own responsibility or on instructions from the Irish Executive; and whether he proposes to have the prohibition of the Irish People newspaper withdrawn.

The Governor withheld the copies of the print referred to on the ground that they contained matter of an objectionable character. He acted on his own responsibility and in the discharge of his duty under the 24th of the prison rules. The Government do not propose to issue any instructions to the Governor, such as suggested.

Then are Governors of Irish goals to be set up as censors of newspapers?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that a large portion of West Cork is scheduled as a congested district, and contains a number of important fishing stations, and also was represented on the Congested Districts Board by the Rev. Charles Davis, late parish priest of Baltimore, he will appoint as successor to Lord de Vesci a representative from the district.

The vacancy on the Congested Districts Board caused by the death of the Rev. Charles Davis, P.P., in 1892, was filled by the appointment of the Most Rev. Dr. O'Donnell, Bishop of Raphoe. The Government have no reason to believe that the interests of the Congested Districts in West Cork have been neglected, as the Question would seem to imply. On the contrary, they are aware that much has been done to promote and foster the fishing industry in that part of Ireland. The vacancy caused by the recent retirement of Lord de Vesci has been filled by the appointment of the Earl of Shaftesbury.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into consideration communications received with reference to the representation of the other districts?

Yes, Sir.

What consideration have they received?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that they have received no consideration whatever?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us the special qualifications of the Earl of Shaftesbury?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Commissioners of Valuation will not under any circumstances revise the valuation of land in Ireland and will he explain how it was that a re-valuation was made in 1899 of that portion of the Great Southern and Western Railway which runs through the No. 1 Tipperary Council District, and the valuation reduced by a considerable amount.

The Commissioner of Valuation has no power, under the Valuation Acts, to increase or lessen the total valuation of lands in any townland. The effect of the revision, in 1899, of the valuation of that portion of the the Great Northern and Western Railway which lies in the district mentioned was to increase, not reduce, the rateable valuation of the railway in that district.

Is it not a fact that in several districts the valuation has been reduced?

The total valuation of the railway has been increased.

That is not the point.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether general instructions have been issued to Local Government Board Inspectors to furnish Councils concerned with their reasons for rejecting applications in connection with schemes of cottages under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts; and, if not, whether such instructions will be issued.

It has been the invariable practice of the Local Government Board to communicate the reasons for rejection, in every such case, to the local Council concerned.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that it is customary for inspectors to the Local Government Board to reject applications made for sites for labourers' cottages on large holdings situate at a distance from public roads, notwithstanding that the approaches to those holdings are the same as used by farmers who live on either side; and whether lie will instruct the inspectors that such sites should not in future be rejected, especially in cases where labourers already live on those holdings.

Section 6 of the Labourers Act of 1883, as amended by Section 3 of the Act of 1886, prescribes that lands cannot be taken compulsorily except they "immediately adjoin, and are accessible from, a then existing public road. "It is not customary for inspectors to reject applications for cottages merely on the ground of the approach to the site, if such approach is a public road, i.e., one over which an undoubted public right of way exists.

Is it the intention of the Government to introduce legislation this session to amend the Labourers Act?

Order, order! That does not arise out of the Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the conduct of a force of police under Sergeant Lyons, of Ballyhaunis, at Island, Co. Mayo, on 24th February last when a man named Patrick Healy, while thanking the people for assistance given by them to the Island tenants in bringing home turf, was set upon by Sergeant Lyons, who struck him with his baton and ordered the constables to disperse the crowd with their batons, with the result that a man named Owen Carney and his wife were knocked down by a constable; and will he state the reason for this attack, and what action he proposes to take in this matter.

I am informed that on the date mentioned a crowd, of which Patrick Healy was a prominent member, lighted a bonfire in the immediate proximity of the house of an individual who has been subjected to intimidation because he is employed as herd on a grazing farm. Healy addressed the crowd and was using language of an intimidatory character, which was endorsed by the crowd, when Sergeant Lyons called upon him to desist in his attacks. This Healy refused to do and the sergeant thereupon called upon the crowd to disperse, as the gathering under the circumstances was an unlawful assembly. The crowd not only refused to disperse but persisted in its illegal course, and the sergeant then ordered the police to disperse it by force. Healy and Carney were struck, but neither Carney nor his wife were knocked down. Mrs. Carney, who had a stone in her hand, incited the crowd to stone the police. The sergeant performed his duty with judgment and tact, and no action is called for as suggested in the Question.

Then are we to understand that in future in Ireland a police sergeant is to be the judge of what is an unlawful assembly?

And are we to take lit that an assembly becomes unlawful immediately a particular speaker uses unlawful language?

That is an abstract question.

But it is the natural outcome of your answer.

Are the police to decide whether or not an assembly is unlawful?

And as to this sergeant, has His Excellency satisfied himself as to his legal knowledge?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the action of Constables Ward, Hyland, and Marshall, of the Ranagissaun Police Barracks, Kilmovee, Co. Mayo, on Thursday, 27th February, in stopping the local band from playing on the public road, at a time when there was no meeting and no disorder of any kind; and whether he will see that such interference is not repeated.

The constables named had good reason to believe that it was the intention of the band to proceed in the direction of the house of a bailiff on a property in this locality, for the purpose of intimidating him. The police requested the leaders of the band to take another road, which they did. The band was not prevented from proceeding in any other direction. There was no undue interference with the band on the part of the police.

What constitutes "good reason to believe" in the minds of the Irish police?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of forthcoming Irish land legislation, he will be prepared to grant the Return relating to Irish Estates in the Land Judges' Court, notice of which stands on to-day's Paper.†

I am informed that the preparation of the Return asked for, with the accuracy without which it would be misleading, would, for reasons too complicated and numerous to be dealt within reply to a Question, makedemands upon the time and labour of the staff of the Court which would seriously impede the work of the Court. I shall be happy to show my hon. friend the Report I have received, if he desires to see it

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has

My right hon. friend has received the communications referred to. With regard to the second part of the Question, the Report made by the engineer appointed by the Board of Works in 1884 stated that special and ample brake-power should be provided and always ready for use on the heavy inclines, and that with adequate traction for heavy loads on these inclines the proposed railway might be efficiently worked. The line when constructed was passed by the Board of Trade. The Board of Works adhere to the opinion that with the proper working required by their engineer, and proper maintenance, the gradients and curves approved by them could be efficiently worked. It does not rest with the Board to take action in this matter.

Did not the engineers of the Board of Works disapprove the line?

I must ask for notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the amount of the Imperial grant allotted to the Richmond Hospital in Dublin; and why this institution is not required under its charter to receive pauper inmates gratuitously; can he say to what class of inmates the funds of this institute are applied; and whether, in the matter of the special cases of paupers sent for treatment from Nenagh Union, he will explain why the custom in existence for the past thirty years of receiving such paupers free should be departed from by the authorities at Richmond Hospital.

The amount annually voted to the House of Industry Hospitals, of which the Richmond Hospital is one, is £7,600. No such conditions as mentioned are attached to the payment of the Parliamentary grant, and the hospital authorities contend they are entitled to charge the guardians of poor law unions the sum of 2s. per head per day, for the maintenance and treatment of pauper inmates sent by these unions. If the hon. Member will refer to the Report of the Select Committee of the House issued in 1854, and to the Report of the Viceregal Commission of 1855, he will find much information as to these hospitals and the class of patients treated in them. As already stated by my right hon. friend, the hospital authorities are not aware that workhouse patients w ere maintained for thirty years before 1895 without payment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have privately informed the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary that the accuracy of the statement in the Question is within my personal knowledge as Chairman of the Nenagh Union for some sixteen years?

I have given the hon. Member the effect of the Report I have received.

It is not a correct report.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can say to whom the Crown parted with its rights to the foreshore between high- and low-water mark near Mallaranny, Co. Mayo, and by what instrument, whether by patent or otherwise.

I understand that the Crown rights in the foreshore near Mallaranny were granted to one John Brown by patent in the 29th year of King Charles II.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state when the trial between the Treasury and the British Museum for the recovery of the Irish gold ornaments will take place.

The time for delivery of defence expired on the 8th inst., but the defendants have taken out a summons asking for a fortnight's further time. This will be opposed; but I cannot commit myself to any opinion as to when the trial will take place.

said he was anxious the Irish Academy should have notice when the trial was likely to take place.

I will see to it.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in view of the inconvenience to business in Ireland arising from the amount of debased silver coinage now circulating in that country, he will take iteps to have all worn silver coins withdrawn.

I presume that the Question refers to worn silver coin. I have never heard that any debased coin is in circulation in Ireland. Worn coin is withdrawn from circulation in Ireland, and forwarded to the Royal Mint for re-coinage, by the Bank of Ireland, which has a large number of branches in the country, and has made uo complaint of any inconvenience to business. If the hon. Member can furnish me with any facts on which his Question is based, inquiry shall be made.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state how many prosecutions have taken place and convictions obtained, respectively, in the provinces of Ulster, Munster, and Connaught in connection with discoveries of illicit stills.

The figures for the year ended 31st March, 1901, are as follows—

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in recognition of the conduct of our Military and Naval forces, both British and Indian, during the recent operations in China, His Majesty's Government will propose that Parliament pass a vote of thanks to them for their services.

In answer to the hon. Gentleman, I have to say that we are entirely in accord with him as to the estimate we have formed of the admirable conduct of the troops engaged in the recent Chinese operations; but from the strictly military point of view the operations seem not to have been of a character which would justify the very exceptional treatment which the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Will the right lion. Gentleman consider whether it is in any way possible to remedy what may seem to be a somewhat invidious distinction between the members of the naval force who have received recognition and those of the military force?

I was not aware there had been any exceptional treatment of one portion of the forces, but if the hon. Gentleman will give me particulars I will make it my business to inquire.

I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been directed to the fact that special and exclusive information was communicated to The Times as to the Cabinet Council originally arranged to be held on Friday last and as to the principal business to be laid before that Cabinet Council; whether he has found out through what channel that information reached The Times, and whether he can assure the House that similar leakage will not occur in the future.

I imagine that what the lion. Gentleman refers to is one of those conjectures in which all newspapers are at liberty to indulge, and in which most of them do indulge.

It is not conjecture; it is a statement of fact.