I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the banking account of the Government of the Transvaal Colony is, to the exclusion of British banks, to be entrusted to the National Bank of the South African Republic, an institution founded with foreign capital; and whether, when the banking account for the Orange River Colony is settled, the claims of a British institution, which has been long established there, will receive due consideration.

The communications with Lord Milner on the subject of the position to be held by these two banks are not yet complete.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether in October, 1900, he received a communication from the Refugees' Committee in Cape Town protesting against their detention in that city, and stating that there was dissatisfaction at the enforced postponement of their return to Johannesburg; whether he is aware that in many instances the places in the mines of the 120,000 British miners driven out of Johannesburg by the war from their work and homes have been filled by Kaffirs; can he state approximately how many of these 120,000 British refugees have been permitted by Lord Milner to return to Johannesburg; and what instructions, if any, has he given to Lord Milner to oppose schemes for the substitution of blacks in the places occupied by whites before the war, in the Transvaal mines.

I received the communication referred to in the Question. Since then, about one-third of the refugees have returned to Johannesburg, and large numbers are going back every month. I have no information to show that in many instances Kaffirs have taken the work previously done by white men, and I see no reason for any special instructions to Lord Milner on the subject.

Will you inform me, Mr. Speaker, if a paragraph was deleted from this Question upon your authority?

The matter has not been brought under my notice before this.

Then, Sir, with your permission, I will raise it as a question of order later on.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that purchases of remounts have been made from a Captain Cane Hunt, a Cheltenham horse dealer, and that most of these horses were purchased by Captain Hunt at the Cheltenham and other repositories at prices varying from fifteen to thirty-one guineas, the average price being twenty-three guineas; and if he will state the number of horses purchased from this dealer, and the average price paid for the same.

No remounts have been purchased from the person mentioned.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, having regard to the fact that shortly after the commencement of the war Captain Wynne Griffith was asked by the War Office to purchase remounts for its account in the Midlands at the Leicester, Crewe, and York repositories, and that he thus obtained the horses at cost price, whether he can explain why this practice of purchasing horses at the hammer was discontinued; and whether he is aware that agents of the German Government both before and during the war have regularly attended these sales, making purchases for the German Army; and whether in future he will follow the same practice as adopted by the German Government.

This officer purchased horses, as stated, at Leicester, Crewe and York, but they proved unsatisfactory and such purchasing was discontinued at the two former places. I have no information as to the latter part of the Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that Bryan George Davies-Cooke, honorary Colonel of the 2nd V.B. Royal Welsh Fusiliers and A.D.O. to His Majesty the King, was, on 1st October, 1901, adjudicated bankrupt, and that on his application for discharge at Chester, on 17th April, 1902, his discharge was suspended for four years. Whether he is aware that in 1878 this gentleman paid to his creditors 7s. 10d. in the £, and that in 1889 another scheme for his creditors' benefit resulted in most of them receiving nothing; whether this gentleman has, in accordance with regulations, notified to his Commanding Officer the fact that he was unable to meet his engagements; whether the matter has been brought to the notice of the Secretary of State for War by the Commander in Chief; and if so, what has been his decision; and, if the bankrupt has not complied with the regulations, whether he will be permitted to hold His Majesty's Commission and continue to act as A.D.C. to His Majesty the King; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter

May I ask whether this officer is not one of the oldest and most zealous of Volunteer officers, and is it any part of the duty of the War Office to hit a man when he is down?

The matter is being dealt with, but the whole facts are not yet before us.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, will a militiaman called up for training this year (1902) receive separation allowance, the same as a regular soldier ordered away for duty, and therefore separated from his wife and family, or the same as a member of the various permanent staffs of the different militia battalions who will shortly assemble for annual training at Salisbury Plain.

The militiamen will not be granted separation allowance.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, seeing that the takingof the Taku Forts, for which a clasp has been granted, formed part of the operations for the relief of Peking, he can consent to reconsider his decision and to recommend the issue of a clasp inscribed "Tientsin." in recognition of the separate actions which included the taking of the Peiyang Arsenal on 27th June, 1900, and the assault and capture of the native city on 13th and 14th July, 1900.

I fear it will not be possible to reconsider the decision which has been already arrived at and acted upon. As I informed the hon. Member, it is not proposed to grant a special clasp inscribed Tientsin. The clasp for the Taku Forts was given because the action was one in which ships took part.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if, seeing that H.M.S. "Leander" is to receive new boilers, he will state what type of boiler is being adopted, who were the manufacturers, what type of boiler is on her at present, and in what year were they fitted on board.

The old boilers of the '"Leander" are to be replaced by single-ended cylindrical boilers. The boilers now being inserted are made by Messrs. J. Brown & Co. of Clydebank. The boilers which are being removed are also cylindrical single-ended boilers. They were fitted on board in 1883.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman why water tube boilers were not fitted in this ship, seeing that they are so much approved of?

Because the ship was built for cylindrical boilers, and no special purpose would be served by the installation of water-tube boilers in her case.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether H.M.S. "Diadem" is going I under her own steam to the Fairfield Works, Glasgow, to be repaired, or whether she is to be towed round; and whether the whole of the work to be done to the machinery and boilers is tendered for; if so, what is the amount of the tender, and what time is specified by the Admiralty for her completion.

The "Diadem" will be towed to Glasgow. The whole of the repairs will be done under a schedule of prices. The date for completion is not yet fixed, but arrangements are being made for the performance of the work as rapidly as possible.

Is this vessel in such a condition that she has to be towed round and cannot steam?

The vessel is to be towed round as her boiler casings have been partially removed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state why bank notes issued by the Government of India are not cashed at their face value at the Government currency offices throughout India.

Currency notes are by law payable only at the office from which they are issued, or at the Presidency town of the Presidency within which that office of issue is situated. This restriction is maintained because, if the currency notes of all circles could be cashed at any one of the currency offices throughout India, it would entail the locking up of much larger balances than at present.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will explain how the sum of £1,000, which appears in the Diplomatic and Consular Estimates as rent allowances in Japan, is made up.

This sum is taken to provide lodging allowances at those stations where there is no Government residence.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the Bishop of Southwell has given his sanction to the vicar of Buxton to practice reservation and the ceremonial use of incense in St. Anne's Church, Buxton, and that this sanction was given without the knowledge or wish of any member of the congregation or of the churchwardens, and whether he proposes to take any action in this matter.

I have no knowledge of the facts of the case referred to, nor have I any jurisdiction in the matter.

To what Minister must I address the Question?

I do not know that any Department has to do with this matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can now say if there is any prospect of the early introduction of the Bill to restrict the out-of-school labour of school children, as suggested by the recent Report of the Employment of Children Committee.

I think it may be advisable to introduce the Bill, and I therefore propose to do so, although,: having regard to the Government programme of business, I am afraid it will: not be possible to hold out any hope of being able to proceed with it this session.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a very sad case of death by drowning, in the Thames near Hurlingham on last Sunday morning, and the conduct of the police authorities as set forth in a letter in The Times of today, from which it appears that, by reason of the prolonged delay of the authorities in getting together a coroner's jury, the parents of Mr. Appleyard have been unable to get possession of the body, the inquest being delayed until to-day; and whether he will cause a thorough investigation to be made into the circumstances with a view to preventing any possibility of the recurrence of such a sad state of things.

Yes, Sir. When my hon. friend drew my attention to this matter, I had already read the letter referred to, with a feeling of the deepest sympathy for the writer and his family. I know nothing of the circumstances, but I have communicated with the coroner concerned, and with the police, and I can assure my hon. friend that the case shall be fully and carefully investigated.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that neither the first nor second mate of Mr. David M'Brayne's thirty-five-year-old paddle steamer "Lovedale" possesses the qualifying navigation certificate; and, seeing that the vessel now carries the mails between Stornoway, Kyle, and Mallaig, and that recently, during the illness of the master, she had to be navigated from Stornoway to Kyle by a visitor who happened to possess a master's certificate, will he take such steps as may be necessary to secure the employment of fully qualified officers on this steamer.

The declaration of the Board of Trade Surveyors, made in November last, shows that the master, mate, and engineer of the vessel to which the hon. Member refers hold certificates of competency, as required by Section 92 of the Merchant Shipping Act. If, in the absence of the regular master, another duly certificated master took charge of the vessel, that would not be contrary either to the Act or to any regulation of the Board of Trade.

Is it the fact that the first and second masters were incompetent to navigate the vessel?

They are not bound to hold a master's certificate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman further inquire into this matter?

I had better have notice of any further Questions.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the Grand Junction Waterworks Company have recently raised their water rate charges 20 per cent. in the Teddington District; and will he ascertain whether this company have raised their charges in all the other districts they serve.

I am informed that the Grand Junction Waterworks Company have not recently raised their charges for water supplied for domestic purposes either in Teddington or any other part of their district, and that if there has been an increased charge in any particular case, this is probably due to some addition to the supply for other than domestic purposes.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he can state the number of trees that have been recently cut down in the course of widening Piccadilly; what has been the cost of the alteration; and if it is proposed to provide any new open space in substitution for the portion of the Green Park that has been taken away.

Sixteen trees were cut down, of which eight were in a decaying condition. Forty-eight new trees, on the other hand, have been planted either in the Park or on the footway. The expenditure on the works, some £8,500, is borne by the London County Council. On work within the Park the Office of Works has spent rather over £200. The answer to the last paragraph of my hon. friend's Question is in the negative.

Is not the congestion opposite Walsingham House greater than ever?

My hon. friend asks this Question the first day after the opening. I am assured that the congestion at Hamilton Place is much less already.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he has received any representations from the Postmaster General or the Government of Canada in reference to the rate of postage charged on newspapers and periodical literature addressed to the Dominion, and whether he is aware that resolutions on this subject passed by Canadian Chambers of Commerce have been sent to Chambers of Commerce in this country; whether he is aware that such mail matter is carried between Canada and the United States at the domestic rate in force in each country; and whether he is aware that as a result the circulation of United States periodicals is increasing largely in Canada, whilst the circulation of English newspapers is greatly falling off; what is the extra cost involved in the ocean carriage of this mail matter; and whether' he can see his way to permit of such mail matter for Canada being carried at the domestic rate chargeable in Great Britain, as all expenses connected with land carriage and deliveries are borne by the Canadian Post Office Department.

Some years ago there was an exchange of views between the then Postmaster General and the Canadian Post Office in regard to a suggestion made by that Office for a reduced postage on "periodical literature" to Canada; but Her late Majesty's Government declined, on grounds of general policy, to entertain the question. The Postmaster General has no knowledge of any communication which has since passed on this subject between Canadian and British Chambers of Commerce. Of the fact that printed matter is carried between Canada and the United States at the domestic rate in each country he is aware, but not of the result in the circulation of American as compared with that of English newspapers. The annual cost of the Atlantic conveyance of all kinds of printed matter for Canada posted in the United Kingdom is about £12,000, and of this amount it is very roughtly estimated that about £7,000 is in respect of newspapers. The hon. Member asks that periodical literature and newspapers may be carried from the United Kingdom to Canada at the domestic rate. So far as periodical literature is concerned, that is already the case. Such matter is carried to Canada, and indeed to all parts of the world, at the rate of ½d. per two ounces, which is the domestic rate as regards all printed matter other than newspapers. As regards the latter, the Postmaster General can see no reason why an exception from the rate applicable to newspapers sent from the United Kingdom to other parts of the world should be made in favour of those for Canada; and a general reduction in the newspaper rate for British colonies or foreign countries would involve a serious loss of revenue.

Cannot the Postmaster General carry newspapers at the same rate as periodicals?.

Not without great loss to the revenue.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Post master General, whether it is a rule of the postal service for a man transferred from one town to another to become junior to the men at the office to which he is transferred without regard to length of service, and if the senior postmen have the choice of walks.

It is the rule for officers transferred from one town to another, for reasons other than those directly for the benefit of the Department, to be placed at the foot of the class to which they are transferred. It is also the rule for the senior postmen of approved service to have the choice of walks.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the Postmaster General has received petitions from the postmen of Richmond, Surrey, in 1900 and 1901 asking for an increased maximum; is he aware Mr. Lewin Hill produced a Table before the Tweedmouth Committee showing that postmen were better paid than police; whether in considering this request he has, in accordance with the rule as laid down by Mr. Lewin Hill, compared the Richmond postmen's pay with that of the Richmond police, seeing that the police are paid 35s., while the postmen's maximum is only 26s.; and seeing that the Secretary to the Treasury stated in the House on 20th February, 1899, that, where the cost of living was higher in proportion to the population, the Post Office was always ready to take them into consideration, and in view of the fact thas the police and all artisans and mechanics in Richmond are paid Metropolitan wages, will he place the Richmond postmen on the same scale as those of Putney and Wimbledon.

The Memorials were duly considered and answered. In the Postmaster General's opinion no increase in the present scale of wages at Richmond is called for. It should be remembered that in addition to their maximum pay of 26s. a week the postmen can, if well conducted, obtain six stripes carrying extra pay of 1s. a week for each five years of service, and they also receive uniform clothing, boot allowance, free medical attendance, and pension on retirement. There is no such Rule as that suggested in the Question; nor are the wages of postmen regulated by those paid to the police But in fixing the postmen's scale due consideration is paid to all the local circumstances affecting the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether any steps are being taken to improve the sanitary condition of 10, Oxford Street branch office; and whether it is proposed to renew the lease of the premises.

There is no reason to think that the conditions of the Branch Post Office at No. 10, Oxford Street are insanitary, but the tenancy will expire at Christmas next, and at present there is no intention of renewing it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state how many justices of the peace, exclusive of ex officios, have been appointed in Ireland since the formation of the present Government, and how many of them are Roman Catholics.

A Return containing this information, was granted on the Motion of the hon. Member for North Leitrim on the 4th March, † The Return is in course of preparation and will be laid on the Table as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether the Commissioners of National Education (Ireland) can state what is the cause of the delay in the issuing of the salaries from the Education Office of W. Murphy, Cloghroe National School, Roll No. 7,242, and of Miss Murphy, National School, Bherings, Roll No. 4,187; and, seeing that payment of the salaries of these teachers was delayed the previous quarter, can he state what is the cause of these delays in payment of salary.

The salary of Mr. Murphy was withheld because the manager has not certified that his conduct was satisfactory. It has now been paid. The salary of Miss Murphy is withheld because the manager has not furnished satisfactory certificates in regard to her.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Boardhave received the Report of Captain Connellan, Local Government Inspector, respecting the recent applications under the Labourers' Act in Kanturk Union, County Cork; and whether he can state why the application of John Cronin, labourer, of South Glynn, electoral division of Tincoora, for an additional half-acre plot was refused, although the occupant of the farm on which the cottage is built did not oppose the application.

The Report was communicated to the District Council in November last. Cronin's application was rejected on the ground that his existing premises were in a dirty and neglected condition.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the proceedings at the quarter-sessions, Newcastle West, County Limerick, on the 16th ultimo, in reference to the case of Mr. Eyre Jevers, J. P., of Glenduff Castle, Charleville, who sued Denis McCarthy, a peasant, to recover the sum of £26 rent due; is he aware that Mr. Jevers produced an extract, which he swore was an exact copy of the estate book, to prove that this sum was due, and that when the original books 'were produced, by order of the county court judge, it was found on examination that only £8 5s. was due; is he aware that the judge characterised the conduct of the plaintiff as reprehensible and the case as deplorable, and stated that he would bring the matter under the notice of the Lord Chancellor; and will he say what action will be taken by the Lord Chancellor in regard to this gentleman.

No, Sir, I have no information in reference to this matter. The Lord Chancellor informs me he has not received any communication from the county court judge in reference to it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a portion of the money voted by Parliament for technical instruction in Ireland is being withheld in Waterford and elsewhere; will he state the amount of the grant under Section 2 of the Technical Instruction Act, 1889, to which the County of Waterford would be entitled, and what is the reason that information as to this grant has not been furnished by the Department; whether any difficulties have been created by the Treasury as to the advancement of this money; and whether any correspondence has taken place between the Treasury and the South Kensington Department of Science and Art and the Department of Technical Instruction in Ireland on this subject; and, if so, has he any objection to publish it.

This Question relates to the grant in aid of technical instruction under the Technical Instruction Acts of 1889 and 1891. The Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction has been advised that there is some doubt whether the grants formerly paid under these Acts, the administration of which has been transferred to the Department, are now legally available upon the same conditions as previously, having regard to the provision of the Endowment of £55,000 for Technical Instruction under the Agriculture and Technical Instruction Act of 1899. This point is engaging the consideration of the Department, but for the present an arrangement has been made by which those localities which have availed themselves of the provisions of the Acts of 1889 and 1891, will be entitled to a grant for three years from the academic year, in respect of which the grants are now being determined. The amount of this grant will not exceed the amount payable under the Acts in respect of the year 1900–1901. No portion of the money voted by Parliament for technical instruction in Ireland is being withheld in Waterford or elsewhere. The sum of £3,500 was voted in the year 1901–1902 and is applicable to those localities which availed themselves of the provisions of the Acts. It does not appear that Waterford is one of these localities. In answer to the concluding inquiry, the correspondence that has taken place, and which is still proceeding, is departmental and it is not proposed to publish it.

Is it not the fact that the Department of Agriculture more than a year ago issued their memoranda to the County Councils and Local Authorities in Ireland giving a solemn and unconditional pledge that an equal amount would be granted under these Acts to any rate raised by the Local Authority; and is it not also the fact that on the faith of that statement rates have been raised? Do the Government now intend to break their pledge?

Negotiations therefore ask are for pending, and I must notice.

I give notice that I shall ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will not reconsider the decision of the Government not to publish Papers.

I shall have to communicate with the Department as to that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if the Government will institute an inquiry, by Royal Commission or otherwise, into the condition and prospects of forests and forest lands in Ireland.

The question is under consideration; but no decision will be come to until the evidence taken by the Forestry Committee for Great Britain is available.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that at the Local Government Inquiry held at Nenagh, North Tipperary, on the 15th ultimo, with regard to the Guardians' proposed scheme for additional labourers' cottages in Nenagh Union, the application of four labourers, namely, J. Duff, J. Creamer, J. Starr, and J. M'Carthy, from the districts of Portroe and Castletown, were refused on the ground that they were working at the slate quarries; and, seeing that the evidence of the district councillors for the divisions showed that these men were bonâ fide labourers, inasmuch as they worked for the neighbouring farmers during the harvest season, being obliged to work in the quarries during other slack times, and that the were at present living in hovels, whether he will take steps to have these men and their families provided with proper houses and the plots of land under the Act.

The Inspector's Report on this Inquiry, which extended over several days, has not yet been received.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many of the Annaghmore, County Armagh, rioters will be brought to trial, when and where the magisterial investigation will take place, and whether the local justices of the peace will be entitled to adjudicate in the case.

Those persons who the Crown may be in a position to prove took an active part in the riot will be proceeded against. As their number may be increased, I must decline, for obvious reasons, to state it at this stage. Those against whom the Crown can now proceed will be brought before the petty sessions of the district in which the riot occurred in the ordinary way, but I must decline to enter further into particulars, as Questions such as this, whatever their object, frequently result in causing resort to the canvassing of jurors and magistrates, and to other methods tending to defeat justice.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chairman of this petty sessions district is Master of the local Orange Lodge?

Order, order!

Are these men to be tried by Removables?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants in the neighbourhood of the Gannon Estate, near Athlone, which is now on the market for sale, have made representations to the Congested Districts Board with reference to the purchase of the said estates for sub-division; and whether the Board will make inquiries into the suitability of this property for acquisition by them with a view to meet the wishes of the people concerned.

The Board have made inquiry, and find that this, estate is not suitable for the purpose of enlarging holdings or for migration.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that Clause 6 of the Education Bill proposes to give the local education authorities, to be created under the Bill, the control of all secular education in the public elementary schools in their areas, it would be competent under the Bill for any local education authority to fix a standard of elementary education more restricted in its scope than that hitherto prescribed by the Whitehall Education Code.

No, Sir; it will be impossible for the local authority to evade; the standard set up by Whitehall, because the Department must be assured that the grants are earned before they are paid, and I take it that if the grants were paid improperly the Auditor General would surcharge them.

Do I understand that the Whitehall inspection will be continued under the Bill?

Oh, yes. Whitehall must have means to make itself acquainted with what is going on in the school. I do not pledge myself, of course, to the proposition that the inspection will remain absolutely unchanged in all its details.

Perhaps I may be allowed to say a few words on the subject, of Questions under the new Rules, which come into operation on Monday next. It will be remembered that the House decided that there was to be no such power of the subsequent rearrangement of Questions as that the important ones were to be put in the privileged earlier part of the list of Questions, and the less important at the end, where there was some possibility of their being excluded from having an oral reply. Of course, that decision of the House stands, and must be fully accepted. I do think, however, that it might be convenient if I could arrange that the first fifty starred Questions shall, as far as possible, be so arranged that those which are addressed to the same Minister shall be grouped together. I Lankly acknowledge that this would be convenient to the Ministers of hard-worked Departments, on whom, under the new system, a considerable additional strain will be thrown. If this grouping were agreed to, it must, of course, be carried out consistently with the arrangements already come to by the House, and must not in any way interfere with them. I think this proposal will not only be to the convenience of Ministers, but of Members asking Questions also.

By what authority does the right hon. Gentleman propose to make this proposed arrangement?

As one who first took exception to the proposed arrangement, I may say that I have no objection whatever to the proposal, as long as the classification is based exclusively on the convenience of the Ministers.

Hear, hear!

I think it is the general feeling that the arrangement proposed should, at any rate, have a fair trial. There is a disposition in all parts of the House to do as much as we can for the convenience of hard-worked Ministers.

What is proposed to be done with the Questions subsequent to the first fifty?

At the doubtful margin of Questions there may be a little inconvenience to Ministers, but, if so, I am afraid I cannot avoid that. It is clear that we must not interfere with the decision of the House. I understand I have the permission of the House to do my best to make a convenient arrangement.

As I was one of those who took the strongest objection to the proposal as it stood in the Rule, I may say I entirely approve the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion, which will effect a reform that has long been wanted.

Are we to understand that on Monday only those Questions which are starred will be answered orally?

The Rule comes in force on Monday.

pointed out that it might happen that all the first fifty Questions would be addressed to one Minister, say the Secretary for Ireland.

That could not happen, as we shall take the first fifty Questions as we find them. The Clerks at the Table would have no trouble in arranging them so as to suit the convenience of particular Ministers.

said there were Questions for Monday which were put down before the Rule was passed, and for which obviously an oral answer was desired. Seeing that they had no asterisk attached to them, how would they be treated?

On Monday, it is to be assumed, the asterisked Questions on the list will be answered orally, and the others not necessarily so; I have no doubt, however, that there will be a certain elasticity in the method in which Ministers answer Questions on the first day, the better to meet the convenience of hon. Members. But the Rule will be in operation.

Would it not be a reasonable assumption that Questions put down before the Rule was passed were intended to be answered orally?

I shall be glad to fall in with the general views of the House.

Will you kindly allow me, Mr. Speaker, to direct your attention to the subject of the editing of Questions at the Table, as a matter of order, and one affecting the rights of Members. I desire strictly to guard myself against anything like a personal attack or an imputation on the learned Gentleman at the Table, from whom I, in common with every other Member of the House, always receive the greatest courtesy, but it is the rule of Parliament that Mr. Speaker, and Mr. Speaker alone, is the judge in regard to the editing of Questions. When I handed in my Question yesterday, I was informed by the clerk at the Table that it would have to be slightly altered. I did not object to that, but I do object to the elimination of the governing sentence of my Question without Mr. Speaker's authority. The sentence cannot be out of order, because a year ago I asked the self-same Question, and on that occasion it was not eliminated.

I am informed that the hon. Member was told at the Table that the Question would be altered.

That is so.

Then in that case the hon. Member should have come to me. The hon. Member says I am responsible for anything that is done. So ultimately I am; but surely the hon. Member does not suppose that every Question is submitted to, and edited by me before it is put into the list. If hon. Members are not satisfied with the view of the clerks at the Table, from whom, I am sure, as the hon. Member says, they receive every courtesy, the question comes before me; and, as the hon. Member was informed that the Question was not a proper one to put on the Paper, he should have come to me. It would be quite intolerable if, whenever an hon. Member was not satisfied with what was done with his Question at the Table, he was to raise a debate in the House.

You somewhat misunderstand me, Sir. It is not my intention to raise a debate. I did not object to alteration, but when I was told by the clerk at the Table that my Question would be altered, I did not understand it to mean mutilation.

The hon. Member, when he was told that the Question would require to be altered, might have asked what the alteration was. If he found the effect of the alteration was to put the Question into a shape in which he did not wish to ask it he could have declined to ask it, or he could have put it down again and then have appealed to me. That is the proper course, and not to raise a question in the open House.

I am quite satisfied with the explanation. I hope the House will forgive me for trying jealously to guard our mutual interests. It is a fault in the right direction.